Latest on MJJC

D.A wants Murray to pay $100 Million to MJs kids

I'm no apologist for Murray ( a life sentence would be too good for him), but I do worry a little about the prospect of punitive damages, especially if they are payable to the children.
I believe Murray is a vindictive man, and already blames Michael for the situation he finds himself in ('Michael trapped me'.. etc). I worry that Murray might use a large 'penalty' sum hanging over him as a kind of perverse incentive / excuse to hit back at Michael...and that could mean another 30 years of slow dripping poison via interviews, articles, books, possibly even a 'what really happened' (Murray's story ) 'alternative' biopic.

Murray has already shown that he will take every opportunity to portray Michael in the least flattering light, and if he was promised large cash sums for saying ever more unpleasant things (no matter how untruthful) , I'm sure he would take the bait...even if the money did not come to him. ( With a large financial penalty, he has nothing to gain, but equally nothing to lose...his 'economic life would essentially be over).
It would be very difficult for the children to have to accept money from activities that continue to harm their father. It is hard enough for them that they may be in a position to receive 'blood money' ie money from their father's killer as some kind of recompense for that killing.

If the 'damages' payable could include a 'no media activities ' clause then that might be manageable...I can't think of any 'non-media' based ways that Murray could harm Michael. But if any 'no media activities' clause only lasted for the period of the sentence eg 2-4 years, I forsee Murray capitalising on his crime for many years to come.

I know the counter argument is probably that 'Murray is going to continue to disparage Michael anyway'....but I just worry about giving him more encouragement.
 
Last edited:
Yes, Murray is going to continue to blame Michael, and I'm sure he will continue to sell stories or tell them for free...It's only worse if he gets to keep the money, it's more encouraging.
If he owes the Estate money, then would that allow the Estate (and later the kids) to get the rights of what he would be doing, before the book/docs are released ? Like what the Goldmans did with the OJ book. Or maybe that could allow a settlement with the Estate , in exchange for not talking publicly about the case ?
 
I just read about this on Yahoo. I like that Walgren gave the judge direct quotes from Murray from the MSNBC documentary about how he did nothing wrong and blamed Michael.
 
Imo there's no space for documentaries about Conrad Murray. The moment has passed and Murray already said everything he wanted to giving his version of the facts. The documentary had poor rates. There's no space for Murray anymore. He should serve his sentence and forget about MJ. The well has dried.
 
myosotis said:
I'm no apologist for Murray ( a life sentence would be too good for him), but I do worry a little about the prospect of punitive damages, especially if they are payable to the children.
I believe Murray is a vindictive man, and already blames Michael for the situation he finds himself in ('Michael trapped me'.. etc). I worry that Murray might use a large 'penalty' sum hanging over him as a kind of perverse incentive / excuse to hit back at Michael...and that could mean another 30 years of slow dripping poison via interviews, articles, books, possibly even a 'what really happened' (Murray's story ) 'alternative' biopic.

Murray has already shown that he will take every opportunity to portray Michael in the least flattering light, and if he was promised large cash sums for saying ever more unpleasant things (no matter how untruthful) , I'm sure he would take the bait...even if the money did not come to him. ( With a large financial penalty, he has nothing to gain, but equally nothing to lose...his 'economic life would essentially be over).
It would be very difficult for the children to have to accept money from activities that continue to harm their father. It is hard enough for them that they may be in a position to receive 'blood money' ie money from their father's killer as some kind of recompense for that killing.

If the 'damages' payable could include a 'no media activities ' clause then that might be manageable...I can't think of any 'non-media' based ways that Murray could harm Michael. But if any 'no media activities' clause only lasted for the period of the sentence eg 2-4 years, I forsee Murray capitalising on his crime for many years to come.

I know the counter argument is probably that 'Murray is going to continue to disparage Michael anyway'....but I just worry about giving him more encouragement.
Click to expand...


I agree. I understand the motion, and on principle, it is fair, but very personally, I wouldnt take that money (that he doesnt have right now anyway). It still feels so weird... However if there's any way this j*** cant be prevented from making money from what he did, I'm for it.
 
kissybissy said:
Imo there's no space for documentaries about Conrad Murray. The moment has passed and Murray already said everything he wanted to giving his version of the facts. The documentary had poor rates. There's no space for Murray anymore. He should serve his sentence and forget about MJ. The well has dried.
Click to expand...

That's what I think too. The interest was clearly absent in MSNBC's Murray documentary, and that was back when the trial was relevant to the general public and still fresh on everyone's mind. That point in time has clearly passed, and any chance of exposure for Murray has clearly passed along with it, as evidenced by the international sub-par ratings the MSNBC piece received.
 
That's my opinion too, and I hope we're right. I believe the lack of interest for that doc has been noticed and it might be remembered in the years to come. In any way, we, as always, will have to watch carefully what's going to happen.
 
myosotis said:
If the 'damages' payable could include a 'no media activities ' clause then that might be manageable...I can't think of any 'non-media' based ways that Murray could harm Michael. But if any 'no media activities' clause only lasted for the period of the sentence eg 2-4 years, I forsee Murray capitalising on his crime for many years to come.
Click to expand...

It would be nice if there could be such a clause for the rest of murray's life but the 1st amendment rights seem to trump everything. I'm more pessimistic about murray's ability to dripfeed lucrative stories into the media. There are lots of ways money could be paid to benefit him indirectly like through his girlfriend/children or secret companies. We all know there are scum reporters like DDimond out there who would be a willing conduit for information. She'd publish any fanciful story murray chose to come up with and there will always be a market for anti-mj stories.

Re the prosecution motion, i would have liked them to have mentioned how murray chose to reveal very personal information about mj, his patient, to a tv documentary, designed to embarrass him and invade his privacy even in death.
 
Bonnie Blue said:
It would be nice if there could be such a clause for the rest of murray's life but the 1st amendment rights seem to trump everything. I'm more pessimistic about murray's ability to dripfeed lucrative stories into the media. There are lots of ways money could be paid to benefit him indirectly like through his girlfriend/children or secret companies. We all know there are scum reporters like DDimond out there who would be a willing conduit for information. She'd publish any fanciful story murray chose to come up with and there will always be a market for anti-mj stories.

Re the prosecution motion, i would have liked them to have mentioned how murray chose to reveal very personal information about mj, his patient, to a tv documentary, designed to embarrass him and invade his privacy even in death.
Click to expand...

I agree completely. I was appalled at this priceless 'gem' (below) from Murray's defence apparently from their sentencing 'plea' documents. Murray never (even as a Dr) considered Michael's privacy once he started talking to the film crew. And yet his defence are still proposing that he might be considered for medical work 'in the community'...I certainly wouldn't want him as my Dr...you can't trust him as far as you can throw him, particularly if anything goes wrong.



The judge should also consider "the manifold collateral consequences that Dr. Murray has sustained as a result of his mistake," the defense said, including the loss of his medical career, the public disgrace and loss of privacy.
"Dr. Murray has been described as a changed, grief-stricken man, who walks around under a pall of sadness since the loss of his patient, Mr. Jackson," the defense said.


http://edition.cnn.com/2011/11/24/ju...ml?eref=rss_us
 
myosotis said:
I agree completely. I was appalled at this priceless 'gem' (below) from Murray's defence apparently from their sentencing 'plea' documents. Murray never (even as a Dr) considered Michael's privacy once he started talking to the film crew. And yet his defence are still proposing that he might be considered for medical work 'in the community'...I certainly wouldn't want him as my Dr...you can't trust him as far as you can throw him, particularly if anything goes wrong.



The judge should also consider "the manifold collateral consequences that Dr. Murray has sustained as a result of his mistake," the defense said, including the loss of his medical career, the public disgrace and loss of privacy.
"Dr. Murray has been described as a changed, grief-stricken man, who walks around under a pall of sadness since the loss of his patient, Mr. Jackson," the defense said.


http://edition.cnn.com/2011/11/24/ju...ml?eref=rss_us
Click to expand...

Memo to self: never read anything about murray after eating a meal....:puke:

This must be a different murray.. His mistake? His MISTAKE?? WHEN did he ever admit he made a MISTAKE? When did he show this mythical ' pall of sadness'?? Frolicking at THE BEACH??? With his BABY MAMA?? At Disneyland?? WHEN??? What kind of creative writing is this? HIS loss of privacy?
This is infuriating! 'the LOSS of his patient?' What, makes it sound as if murray mislaid Michael in a fog, why beat around the bush, just say...since his 'mistake' caused the death of Mr. Jackson. But no, he is totally incapable of admitting any such thing.
I didn't think it was possible to despise him any more than I do.
I was wrong.
 
I applaud Walgren (as usual), but am a little surprised he's asked for it since Murray would not be able to pay it. Maybe he is asking for that figure as a representation of the earnings, with an expectation that the judge will set a lower figure (if he sets one) but at least have the prosecution's figure on record. I'm not sure.
 
If the D.A. request is granted, I can see AEG filing a law suite against Murray for lost revenue. This would also give Joe more leverage in his civil suite.
 
is it 1 mil per kid? All the money in the world isn't going to be enough to stop the hurt.
 
This is a great move, so if Muarry tries to get money from documentaries or any other deals, it will all go to pay his debt. He does not have money but this lets him know he is liable for restitution.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top