elusive moonwalker
Guests
A question that has been on my mind for some time :
So, in a legal point of view : the DA doesn't need to prove WHO did the last injection ?
Would that be different with murder 2 ? A comment from Thomas Mesereau (made about a year ago) confused me : he was talking about murder 2, and said the the DA would have to prove murder.
i dont think it would make any difference. its the actions ie having no equipment and the covering up that help push it to murder two imo when u look at the legal definition. my question would be is what the coroner saying acutally a legal point. ie is it just his opinion that it would still be homicide to him casue of the lack of care or does it actually state that in the law. cause if it does at the end of the trial when the judge gives his instructions will he be saying to the jury. it doesnt matter if u arent sure that murray injected the dose. what u should be deicding on is whether his actions as a whole were negligent to the point of M.S