Latest on MJJC

Discussion about Charges against Dr. Murray / all threads merged

Re: Felony Murder?

This law should already exist,and it's really sad that Mike had to die to bring the case on the spotlight.
If such a law was voted now,they'd sure have to give it a retroactive effect,otherwise defense teams will easily drag their clients out of their charges.
 
Re: The charges against Murray Are simply wrong!

Although charges are not sufficient for what Murray did,I am kind of worried.
Why does everybody,including Tom Mesereau, say that the risk of raising the charges is not being able to prove them and Murray walking free?
And that the DA wants to be on the safe side in view of the upcoming elections?
Why would that have to do with anything?
The DA's ambitions are completely irrelevant to his duty, which is bringing justice!
If he is a man of honor and believes that the charges should be upgraded,he should do it without a second thought.
He is paid by the people,he is working for the people.
 
Re: Felony Murder?

Maria MJ said:
This law should already exist,and it's really sad that Mike had to die to bring the case on the spotlight.
If such a law was voted now,they'd sure have to give it a retroactive effect,otherwise defense teams will easily drag their clients out of their charges.
Click to expand...

Is that possible at all? I thought that the rule was that no law works "back in time"?
 
Re: The charges against Murray Are simply wrong!

And that the DA wants to be on the safe side in view of the upcoming elections?
Why would that have to do with anything?
The DA's ambitions are completely irrelevant to his duty, which is bringing justice!
If he is a man of honor and believes that the charges should be upgraded,he should do it without a second thought.
He is paid by the people,he is working for the people.
Click to expand...
thats if u live in eutopia. the D.A wants to be known as the man who got murray, not the man who blew it like sneddon. he believes that winning the case against murray will help him big time in winning the state job. all the publicity etc that a win will bring. so the argument is he wont charge murder 2 cause hes worried that theres a bigger chance he could lose.so hes sticking to MS to give him the best chance of a conviction and therefore it helps him with the state job
 
Re: The charges against Murray Are simply wrong!

elusive moonwalker said:
thats if u live in eutopia. the D.A wants to be known as the man who got murray, not the man who blew it like sneddon. he believes that winning the case against murray will help him big time in winning the state job. all the publicity etc that a win will bring. so the argument is he wont charge murder 2 cause hes worried that theres a bigger chance he could lose.so hes sticking to MS to give him the best chance of a conviction and therefore it helps him with the state job
Click to expand...

That's what I think too. That Cooley is sticking to the IM charge as its the easiest to prove hence he gets his win. He wants to win this case and murder 2 carries too much risk that he'll lose the case.
 
Re: Michael Jackson's death - manslaughter or murder?

ive got a question. at the prelim does the judge make a ruling there and then as to whether it goes to trial or does he give one a day or 2 later? anyone know or remember from previous cases
 
Re: The charges against Murray Are simply wrong!

"Lies run sprints, but the truth runs marathons."

And with those powerful words, risen in the face of chaos (2005 trial), I will continue to aim for the TRUTH no matter what.
 
Re: Michael Jackson's death - manslaughter or murder?

The 5th April (easter monday) is a holiday in my country, all authorities are closed .. and in the US? I can't find any informations online :scratch:
 
Re: The charges against Murray Are simply wrong!

now, Oxman is selling t-shirts and caps for $25 each.
Click to expand...
why am i not surprised. leaches till the end
 
Re: Michael Jackson's death - manslaughter or murder?

mj_smile said:
The 5th April (easter monday) is a holiday in my country, all authorities are closed .. and in the US? I can't find any informations online :scratch:
Click to expand...

Easter is always celebrated on a Sunday in the U.S., and April 5th is a Monday. So unless the courts take an extra day off, which I tend to doubt, things should still go on as expected on the 5th. Hope that helps.
 
Re: Michael Jackson's death - manslaughter or murder?

bgz said:
Easter is always celebrated on a Sunday in the U.S., and April 5th is a Monday. So unless the courts take an extra day off, which I tend to doubt, things should still go on as expected on the 5th. Hope that helps.
Click to expand...
Thus we have one more day, that's just fine :D

Yes bgz, it helps :)
on 5th April I'm unfortunately offline *argh*
 
Re: Michael Jackson's death - manslaughter or murder?

What REALLY happened to him???

Warning beforehand, below takes a strong heart and mind to read. So don't read if you can't take the details of what really happened to Michael that night.

Well, I just had the strangest feeling that it all may have been forced.

Doctors, when alone, can do very cruel things. They have almost total or absolutely total control of their patients lives. All they have to do is cover the patient's mouth, force drugs into the patient's bloodstream by IV and that's it. How easy is that?

I just had this strange feeling that motha2aflame is correct. It was all forced. And their was a struggle. Michael did not die peacefully. He was held down, struggling for his life while drugs were being forced into him.

This feeling is so sickening, but it's so real.

But the thing is, I can't say for sure it was Murray. All I know is that it was SOMEONE in that house.

No...It was all forced. There was no peaceful depart, just a violent struggle.

We have to do something, guys. We must do something, all of us.

Also, I heard that Michael was found with his eyes open, and his tongue out. IF that was true, which I PRAY not, that isn't peaceful. People who die peacefully look peaceful when they are gone.

I wonder if that could be used in court in some way. Serously, if Michael was found like that, then he did NOT die in his sleep. And if his eyes really were wide open, then there was probably a struggle on his part. But all Michael had to do was snatch all equipment off, right? Unless, someone was keeping him from doing so.
 
Re: Michael Jackson's death - manslaughter or murder?

eyes were open but not known how much murray would have checked pupils. tongue wasnt out. mouth was open due to the CPR
mj had a huge amount of diprivan and benzos in him theres no way he was awake
 
Re: Michael Jackson's death - manslaughter or murder?

He was long gone before they arrived at UCLA.
Even if the heart fluttered from movement and medication,the brain was already dead.
Wtf...imagine what they could have done if only Michael had been brought immediately at the hospital..he would still be alive.
 
Re: Michael Jackson's death - manslaughter or murder?

imagine what they could have done if only Michael had been brought immediately at the hospital..he would still be alive.
Click to expand...
that all depends on when murray found him and how long he waited. mj was already gone when he was on the bed
 
Re: Michael Jackson's death - manslaughter or murder?

Maria MJ said:
He was long gone before they arrived at UCLA.
Even if the heart fluttered from movement and medication,the brain was already dead.
Wtf...imagine what they could have done if only Michael had been brought immediately at the hospital..he would still be alive.
Click to expand...

And a doctor would KNOW that. This DOES NOT make sense.

It was all a planned first degree.

that all depends on when murray found him and how long he waited. mj was already gone when he was on the bed
Click to expand...

But yeah, I think Michael was already gone for a long long time before. I don't know what to make of them reviving Michael's heartbeat. Can that be done when a person is already dead?

Or are they just making something big out of a small peanut?
 
Re: Michael Jackson's death - manslaughter or murder?

I still find it odd that Michael asked for Propofol at 10:40am (according to Murray).
 
Re: Michael Jackson's death - manslaughter or murder?

But yeah, I think Michael was already gone for a long long time before. I don't know what to make of them reviving Michael's heartbeat. Can that be done when a person is already dead?
Click to expand...
well u can get an idea from the autopsy and when the stages of mortis started. imo he wasnt dead for hours as we first thought. the medics delared him gone at the house so yes u can still get a reaction afeter all it was a artifical heartbeat that was created by the drugs. like being on life support.
 
Re: Michael Jackson's death - manslaughter or murder?

artik said:
I still find it odd that Michael asked for Propofol at 10:40am (according to Murray).
Click to expand...

The time he was supposed to be up, getting ready to go to rehearsals.

Yeah, that's odd.
 
Unappropriate Charges In Case

I have been speaking with someone in the medical field who's been looking into all this. And also wishes to remain anonymous as of now. This is only what I am allowed to disclose.

One thing of interest-MJ was on Flomax-this is for BPH-and would cause a change in metabolizing meds cleared thru renal system-slowing the elimination of the active metabolites and compounding the effect of overdoses-Also Versed is another benzo-used as anesthesia (used for conscious sedation and as adjunct to generals) which was given with high doses of IV Xanax and all these others have longer 1/2 lives leading to respiratory depression-distress-leads to cardiac arrest-propofol admin is the most unconscionable action-so unbelievably hazardous and frankly should be looked at as way beyond what so far Murray is charged with - and should be at least voluntary-rather than involuntary MS-I don't believe the prosecution would be over reaching seeking a conviction for M2.

-the benzos were killer lethal long acting exponentially compounding and synergistically interacting with MJ's system and there are many factors we take into consideration when titrating narcs-benzos and anti-psychotic meds-one huge factor is age-then dietary -chronic diseases- other meds administered for chronics-weight-activity level-and lab values to determine loading of the residual effects of the metabolites and end products of the meds-elimination and lack of that as well. Labs are to be drawn to monitor both hepatotoxic and nephrotoxic levels (liver and kidneys functions).

There were so many things wrong with the medical ineptitude and outright disregard for Michael's safety and his life that it is very difficult to review all this without becoming emotionally distressed.
 
Last edited:
Re: Unappropriate Charges In Case

thanks for sharing... I really hope that many medical professionals will come forward with similar testimony during the trial.
 
Re: Unappropriate Charges In Case

yeah alot agree it should be murder 2 even if you dont think it was premeditated jsut murder 2 by negligence. but either the D.A doesnt care or just wants a conviction even if its on lesser charge in order to cement his career and to make a name for himself.

without a solid motive its hard to prove voluntary M/S even more so when its a doctor
 
Re: Unappropriate Charges In Case

But what about if other medical experts come up to speak? Don't you think they would know these things?

There were SO MANY things wrong. How can the doctor NOT know? It really gets down to the point of did he go to medical school?
 
Re: Unappropriate Charges In Case

I think it also matters how technical this would all get in order to prove a higher charge. Cases have been lost just because the nuances of a particular case could not be fully explained in layman's terms so that the jury could understand the gravity of the actions. And you can bet in this case anyone with the possibility of understanding will be eliminated from the jury pool by Murray's lawyers.

From just reading what you wrote, I had to start skimming over it because at this point in the day, all of those medical terms just glaze my eyes over. Imagine if you were a jury and had to listen to those terms all day over several days while they argued and counterargued every point medically. It would be dizzying. And a jury out of caution when they are confused would most likely acquit then find guilty.

As much as I think it is M2, unless they can find something more a jury can relate to, I think Murray would get off. JMHO.
 
Re: Unappropriate Charges In Case

ginvid said:
From just reading what you wrote, I had to start skimming over it because at this point in the day, all of those medical terms just glaze my eyes over. Imagine if you were a jury and had to listen to those terms all day over several days while they argued and counterargued every point medically. It would be dizzying. And a jury out of caution when they are confused would most likely acquit then find guilty.
Click to expand...

That is what was explained to me, not to a jury. And what you are seeing right there is only a general explanation.

Come trial, a medical expert can definately break it all down to the most simplest explanation to help EVERYONE understand.

How do they deal with other many cases involving medical misconduct? They can break it all down in that courtroom when the trial comes.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top