Latest on MJJC

Are Us Government Officials Afraid of the Person(s) Who Killed Michael Jackson?

CherubimII

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
6,923
Points
113
I sometimes feel the US Government is afraid to Prosecute the Person(s) Who Killed Michael Jackson.

Do you feel this way sometimes?
 
CherubimII said:
I sometimes feel the US Government is afraid to Prosecute the Person(s) Who Killed Michael Jackson.

Do you feel this way sometimes?
Click to expand...

By US government, you mean the Federal branch, or the State of Calif and/or LA government branches?

If you're talking about the US/Federal govt, then I don't think they'd be afraid to prosecute a case, Michael or not. As for the Calif/LA depts, there's always a possibility when it comes to "politics", but "afraid" may not be the appropriate word.

jmo
 
I dont think theyre afraid, I just think they all have their own agenda's and none of it is in Michael's best interest.
 
Afraid? No, I think it's more to do with the evidence they have (or haven't got) in this case. I'd rather say they're being "careful". (Perhaps too overly.)
 
I think they are just being careful _ prosecutors dont like or want to loose a case
They want a guilty verdict from the Jury _ most likely why they are cautious with the charge
they have to have evidense to prove beyond a doubt _ They cant use internet rumours or hearsay
in court. a Jury will not convict inless they can prove their case.

I would rather have him found guilty of manslaughter then have him walk free of a 2nd degree.
_I believe thats what the prosecution wants _ GUILTY _They may not feel that 12 Jurors will
ALL convict on 2nd degree .... being Cautious

Remember a Jury decides
based on proven facts - not on fans opinions of what they think happened
 
Last edited:
Interesting interview with T mez here which explains why a conviction may be difficult



Michael Jackson’s accused killer, Dr. Conrad Murray, may not be convicted so easily.

That’s what Jackson’s former defense lawyer, Thomas Mesereau, suggests in an interview that’s buried in a new book.

The interview is with, of all people, Judge Larry Seidlin, the “crying judge” who made a fool of himself when he presided over the Anna Nicole Smith inquest in Florida. Not satisfied with his two minutes of fame, Seidlin has “published” a “book” called “The Killing of Anna Nicole Smith.”

I’ll skip Seidlin’s sad efforts to get Mesereau to praise him. Certainly, Mesereau slyly ignores Seidlin’s request for compliments. But what Mesereau, a top notch criminal defense lawyer, does say might be of interest. It’s particularly noteworthy since he liked Michael Jackson a lot, and fought hard for his acquittal in 2005.

Mesereau says: “I think that any prosecutor is going to be a little hesitant to go after someone who appears to be just the delivery person” – in regard to Anna Nicole’s situation. But then he continues: “You know, any crime requires a certain mental state, a certain form of intent. In law school, you learn about the general intent and specific intent but regardless of what term you use, it does require one to have a criminal state of mind to be guilty of almost any crime.”

There’s a lot more along this line, but Mesereau then answers a question by bringing in the Elvis Presley case–and this is relevant to Dr. Murray as it is to Dr. Christine Ehrosevich, who was Anna Nicole Smith’s doctor.

“Remember, the physician who was prescribing Elvis Presley inordinate amounts of medication was charged with manslaughter and acquitted years ago. So juries, in my opinion, don’t like to convict doctors unless there’s a tremendous pattern of abuse and criminal conduct.”

Mesereau continues, speaking in general circumstances: “Now if the doctor committed malpractice, maybe that belongs in a civil trial, maybe it belongs in an administrative hearing on his license. But I think a lot of people are reluctant to bring it to [the] level of a crime.”

Jackson fans are very emotional about Dr. Murray. But things when you get into a courtroom. Mesereau’s thoughts on this subject cannot be overlooked. I’m sure Dr. Murray’s lawyers are paying close attention to them.

http://www.showbiz41...convict-doctors

0
 
Toms quote is most likely true and why prosecution has to be careful if they want a conviction
Juries, in my opinion, don’t like to convict doctors unless
there’s a tremendous pattern of abuse and criminal conduct.”
Tom Mesereau
Click to expand...
 
Many prosecutors give the jury the option to convict of lesser charges, which is what I feel should have been done. They should have file 2nd degree & then given the jury the option. The prosecution did not IMO because they want Murray to plea to a lesser charge (which politically I think would be impossible) & to limit testimony at trial about AEG & what responsibility they might have.
 
I dont think that the government is afraid of anybody...I think that their is so much corruption out there regarding this case that no one can see straight enough to give a proper charge,,,corruption from the top of the case to the bottom of the case..as a matter of fact I would not be surprised if the judge himself gets a payoff. They could careless about Michael Jackson..they all have their own agenda's. It doesn't help the case when the family themselves dont tell what they know....or speak in riddles and leave the world wondering what they mean...never mind the DA to figure out what they mean...we have all been witness to this. There is sufficient evidence to convict Murray of murder 2....like I said they just chose to line their pockets with blood money and go after a IM charge. We are not naive...we know what happened to Michael....and what happened was not an accident like they want us to believe..the answers are right infront of our faces...all we have to do is look for them.....and you will see.
 
No, I don't think they are afraid.

Jermaine said people were LAUGHING in the courtoom during Murray's hearing. If people in the courtroom are joking and laughing, then what are the government officials doing?

this reminds of me of that movie, emily rose. how her court case was being surrounded by dark forces to keep the truth hidden. it was based on a true story.
 
Let's put it this way. "Government officials", wether on the state level or federal level had no issues to go after MJ for years. How do you think Sneddon pulled of what he did?
There's an interesting line in DS about who "Dom Sheldon" is in cahoots with.
Becoming the ultimate persona non grata is apparently not all that difficult. There's a reason MJ sang that he "ain't scared of no sheets."

I do wonder who all was involved in making MJ's life hell on earth. I doubt that those responsible are particularly afraid to persecute the right people, most likely they just don't want to- after all they spend years of trying to lock him.

He's finally gone, congratulations, you got rid of him. Happy now?

Reminds me a lot of Ghosts. "So, do you still want me to go?" "Yes, yes, yes!"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top