January 7th, 2011
DIRECT EXAMINATION: MS. BRAZIL
Anding states in February of 2009 she was working as a cocktail waitress at Sullivan's Steakhouse in Houston, Texas, located off Highway 59 and Post Oak Blvd. She had been working there the previous 6-8 months since February 2009. (Her exact words were "I was there for 6, 6-8 months" which sounds more like her length of total employment rather than how long she had been working there before she met Murray.) She describes Sullivan's Steakhouse as having a dining room, a lounge/bar area and a club in the back were bands perform. Anding states she met Murray at Sullivan's Steakhouse. She claims to have initially met him before Valentine's Day, then after Valentine's Day, then states she cannot recall. She says all she can recall about initially meeting him is she had only been working at Sullivan's Steakhouse for 2 or 3 months. She agrees with Brazil that it was likely at the beginning of March.
(Notice that the timeline of when she met Murray and how long she had been working at Sullivan's Steakhouse do not completely add up. From my view it seems she meant she worked at Sullivan's Steakhouse for a total of 6-8 months rather than she had been working there for that duration before meeting Murray. If I am correct in my assumption this would mean she likely began working at Sullivan's Steakhouse sometime in December 2008 or January 2009, assuming she met Murray in March, and then no longer worked for Sullivan's Steakhouse beginning sometime between June and August 2009.)
Anding states when she first met Murray he stated he was working in Houston, at his clinic. She says he told her about his clinic. She recalled striking up a conversation with him and receiving a large tip the first time they met.
A discussion at the side bar begins. The prosecution, Court and defense begin arguing about the relevance of Anding and Murray's financial and romantic relationship. The Court then states for the purposes of this hearing that the relationship is not significant. The prosecution (Walgren) states the nature of their relationship highlights the placement of Murray's priorities, that his priority that morning, specifically at 11:51 a.m. was making a phone call to Anding rather than tending to his patient. The Court remarks that Walgren has used the term "cocktail waitress" in a demanding manner--Walgren disagrees. The Court states the prosecution may explore the social relationship but there are limits on discussing financial arrangements since this is a preliminary hearing. The Court states at some other time Murray and Anding's financial relationship may be relevant. The defense (Flanagan) jumps in and states that nothing outside of June 25th is relevant in the case. Chernoff then says it is not a coincidence that Anding, Morgan and Nicole Alvarez are all giving testimony in the same day. He further claims their evidence is not relevant but rather is being used to create prejudice against Murray.
The Court states he is not going to spend the entire day dealing with the matter mentioned above. He states the bottom line is the parties are allowed to explore relationships within certain limits of the preliminary hearing.
Discussion resumes in open court. Anding states the first time Murray and she met he gave her his phone number. She returned the favor by giving him her phone number. Anding agrees that after their first meeting she saw him with some frequency. Anding states she was not Murray's girlfriend. However, she then states that he referred to her as his girlfriend. He purchased her gifts.
Anding agrees her phone number is (832) ***-3832. This is her cell phone number. She agrees that she received a phone call from Murray on June 25th, 2009. She was in Houston. She states she knows it was 12:30 p.m. (Central Standard Time) because she was getting ready go to out. She agrees he called her on his cell phone.
(Please note this time does not reflect the correct time he called her--phone records indicate Murray called Anding at 11:51 a.m. PST which would mean he called Anding at 1:51 p.m. Houston/CST).
Brazil: WHAT DID HE SAY WHEN HE FIRST SPOKE WITH YOU ON THE PHONE ON JUNE 25, 2009?
Anding: HE TOLD ME IT'S CONRAD MURRAY, AND HE SAID, "HELLO, HOW ARE YOU?"AND I SAID, "FINE. HOW ARE YOU?"
Brazil: AND WHEN YOU SPOKE WITH HIM THAT DAY, DID YOU RECOGNIZE HIS VOICE BECAUSE YOU HAD SPOKEN TO HIM ON THE PHONE ON OTHER OCCASIONS?
Brazil: SO HE IDENTIFIED HIMSELF, AND HE ASKED YOU HOW YOU WERE?
Brazil: DID HE TELL YOU HOW HE WAS DOING?
Brazil: WHAT DID HE SAY TO YOU?
Anding: HE TOLD ME THAT HE WAS DOING WELL, AND THAT WAS IT. THEN I CUT HIM OFF, AND I STARTED TALKING.
(Side note--did Anding not just contradict herself? She says he did not tell her how he was doing then in the very next sentence she says he told her he was doing well.)
Brazil: WHAT DO YOU MEAN YOU CUT HIM OFF?
Anding: I CUT HIM OFF LIKE, I GUESS, HE WAS GOING TO SAY SOMETHING. AND I WAS, I TOLD HIM, "WELL, LET ME TELL YOU ABOUT MY DAY." ALL I HEARD HIM SAY, "WELL, I AM DOING FINE, WELL." AND THAT IS LIKE WHEN I WAS LIKE, LET ME TELL YOU ABOUT MY DAY.
Brazil: SO YOU BASICALLY INTERRUPTED HIM, CORRECT?
Brazil: AND THEN YOU PROCEEDED TO TALK ABOUT WHAT?
Anding: WELL, JUST TALK ABOUT HOW HE WAS DOING, AND WHAT I WAS ABOUT TO GO DO. AND I HAVEN'T TALKED TO HIM IN AWHILE. AND THAT IS WHEN I REALIZED HE WASN'T ON THE PHONE ANYMORE.
(Side note--did Anding not just contradict herself again? She says she interrupts him then says they discussed how he was doing. I find it peculiar that she would decide to tell him all about her day and her well-being when it was he who initiated the call--as in, typically when someone initiates a call they are the one who has something to say initially.)
Anding says the last time she had seen Murray in person was May 23rd, 2009. They went to eat somewhere in Houston.
Brazil: SO YOU INTERRUPT DOCTOR MURRAY, AND YOU BEGIN JUST CHATTING WITH HIM ABOUT YOUR DAY AND WHAT'S GOING ON IN YOUR LIFE, CORRECT?
Brazil: AND WHAT DID HE SAY IN RESPONSE?
Anding: I DIDN'T HEAR HIM ON THE PHONE ANYMORE.
Brazil asks for clarification on what is meant by Anding's statement.
Anding: HE WASN'T ON THE PHONE NO MORE. I HEARD COMMOTION AS IF THE PHONE WAS IN A POCKET OR SOMETHING. THE NOISE WAS LIKE (SOUND) AND I HEARD COUGHING LIKE (SOUND) AND THEN I HEARD LIKE MUMBLING OF VOICES AND THEN I STAYED ON THE PHONE FOR PROBABLY FIVE TO SIX MINUTES AND I HUNG UP AND I KEPT CALLING AND CALLING AND TEXTING AND TEXTING, AND THEN I NEVER HEARD FROM HIM AGAIN.
Brazil: LET'S GO BACK THE POINT IN TIME DURING YOUR CONVERSATION WITH CONRAD MURRAY THAT YOU REALIZED THAT HE'S NOT SAYING ANYTHING TO YOU CAN YOU ESTIMATE FOR ME ABOUT HOW FAR INTO THE PHONE CALL FROM THE TIME HE SAID "HELLO" TO YOU UNTIL THE TIME THAT YOU REALIZED HE WASN'T THERE ANYMORE BECAUSE HE WASN'T SAYING ANYTHING TO YOU?
Anding's reply is 5 minutes.
Brazil asks Anding if she would have any way in knowing when Murray stopped listening to her. She says no.
Brazil: YOU TOLD US THAT YOU WERE SPEAKING INTO THE PHONE. DID YOU EVER SAY ANYTHING SPECIFIC TO, INTO THE TELEPHONE WHEN YOU REALIZED THAT HE WASN'T SAYING ANYTHING IN REPLY?
Anding: NO. I JUST REMEMBER SAYING, "HELLO, HELLO, HELLO. ARE YOU THERE? ARE YOU THERE? ARE YOU THERE?"
Brazil: AND WHEN YOU SAID ALL OF THOSE THINGS, DID YOU GET ANY RESPONSE BACK FROM CONRAD MURRAY?
Anding states no.
Brazil: WHEN YOU HEARD THE MUMBLING ON THE OTHER END, WERE YOU ABLE TO TELL IF IT WAS DOCTOR MURRAY'S VOICE THAT YOU RECOGNIZED THE MUMBLING TO BE COMING FROM?
Anding states no.
Anding agrees she tried to call Murray back and received no response. She also states she texted him and received no response either.
Brazil asks if it was unusual for Murray not to call back after being disconnected while speaking to each other on the phone. Anding states yes.
Brazil asks when Anding next spoke to Murray after June 25th, 2009. Chernoff objects. Court overrules. Anding states she last spoke to him when the L.A.P.D. came to her house after a baseball game (the Houston Astros). She could not recall the month but states it was in 2009. She states she does recall it was around 9:00 p.m. and she was in the car headed home. She states that at some point while she was at the baseball game she learned from her father police detectives wanted to speak with her.
She says that when she was notified that the detectives were at her house she called Murray and told him that detectives were at her house. She says he apologized and gave her the number to his attorney. He told her that if she spoke with L.A.P.D to have his lawyer present. She told Murray "okay".
Anding agrees that she called the attorney that Murray instructed her to call. Anding agrees she spoke to the attorney the next day. Throughout this discussion Chernoff is objecting to most of the questioning. Most objections are sustained.
Brazil completes her direct examination.
CROSS-EXAMINATION: MR. CHERNOFF
Anding states she is doing fine. She flew into L.A. "yesterday". She states L.A.P.D. paid for her airfare. L.A.P.D. paid for her hotel/motel accommodations the previous night but will not be paying for her to stay tonight. She states she will be flying out today.
Chernoff: NOW ALL THE THINGS YOU TESTIFIED TO TODAY, YOU TOLD THIS MAN, DAN MEYERS, DIDN'T YOU?
Anding agrees and states she did not add anything today that was different to what she told Dan Myers (L.A.P.D).
Chernoff ends his cross examination.
Brazil does not re-direct examine and Anding is excused.
The transcripts used to create these summaries were lawfully obtained from www.teammichaeljackson.com.