New Documentary :Killing Michael Jackson' (about the Murray investigation) 22 June 19 UK

ScreenOrigami

Proud Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2019
Messages
2,682
Points
48
NatureCriminal7896;4300827 said:
So....? it's really Murray fault?

Absolutely. He was found guilty of involuntary manslaughter and sentences to 4 years in prison. There’s no doubt about that.
 

ScreenOrigami

Proud Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2019
Messages
2,682
Points
48
elusive moonwalker;4300764 said:
Standard procedure about only doing half your sentence unless its a crime with special circumstances. Happens in the uk aswell. He didnt even do two. Just under.

A bit offtopic, but I just looked up how these things are handled here in Germany. 50% of all prisoners are serving the full sentence. There’s a long list of criteria to fulfill to be released after 2/3 of the time, and only about 1.5% are released after serving half the sentence. The personality of the prisoner plays a huge part in the decision. So, Murray would most likely not have been released early here in Germany.

Source (in German): https://strafrecht-info.de/vorzeitige-haftentlassung-kriterien-checkliste/
 

ScreenOrigami

Proud Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2019
Messages
2,682
Points
48
NatureCriminal7896;4300857 said:
I feel Murray should of got more time. he murder someone. why murray murder michael?

He didn’t plan to do it. That’s what you’d call a 1st degree murder.

But he consciously risked MJ’s life. He was aware of the dangers of what he was doing and did it anyway, for the money.
 

ScreenOrigami

Proud Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2019
Messages
2,682
Points
48
NatureCriminal7896;4300861 said:
What money? Michael's or someone else's?

Someone else here may know this better, as I’m not done researching this topic yet, but as far as I recall, AEG agreed to pay him $100,000 per month, at MJ’s request.
 

ScreenOrigami

Proud Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2019
Messages
2,682
Points
48
NatureCriminal7896;4300866 said:

Michael knew Murray from Las Vegas where he had cured his children from the flu or something like that. Then, Michael wanted a personal doctor for the time of the rehearsals and the time in London. So he went to AEG (the concert promoter) and requested that they hire Murray as his personal doctor. Murray was hired for $100,000 per month. Since that is a lot of money for a doctor, he was willing to ignore the risk of his unusual insomnia “treatment” – and from there on it went wrong. He was putting MJ’s life at risk every night.
 

ScreenOrigami

Proud Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2019
Messages
2,682
Points
48
NatureCriminal7896;4300871 said:
:doh: poor michael he should of been more careful. that is ridiculous.

Yes, a tragic turn of events. I can tell you from my own experience that insomnia can drain the spirits out of you, particularly when you’re on a schedule and can’t take a nap whenever it decides to come to you. But Murray should have turned down the request anyway, as other doctors before him have.
 

NatureCriminal7896

Proud Member
Joined
Apr 19, 2019
Messages
10,309
Points
0
I agree. i understand Michael couldn't sleep but that was his life. he cared about his fans more then his own life. that's really saying something. also Murray knew what he was doing. he definitely should of got more time.

R.I.P Michael bless you.
 

Mary93

Proud Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2014
Messages
354
Points
18
I feel Murray should of got more time. he murder someone. why murray murder michael?

It was clearly a murder, and I also think that he was a pawn in others' hands.... but the "official" truth will always be that he committed an 'involuntary manslaughter' and that even Michael may have been responsible for his own death..... it's the easiest way :(
 

NatureCriminal7896

Proud Member
Joined
Apr 19, 2019
Messages
10,309
Points
0
Murray should had said no to michael if he asked for Propofol. i understand he couldn't sleep but he kind of kill himself in someways because he was the one who kept asking for it when reality it wasn't good for him and they all knew.
 

PoP

Proud Member
Joined
May 25, 2008
Messages
6,526
Points
63
Mary93;4301141 said:
It was clearly a murder, and I also think that he was a pawn in others' hands.... but the "official" truth will always be that he committed an 'involuntary manslaughter' and that even Michael may have been responsible for his own death..... it's the easiest way :(

California laws are just screwed up. I agree he should’ve been a murder charge, that was no involuntary slaughter and he gets 5 years but released early? I always knew their justice system is the most screwed up in state, hell even the most screwed up in the country.
 

somewhereinthedark

Proud Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2012
Messages
986
Points
43
NatureCriminal7896;4301142 said:
Murray should had said no to michael if he asked for Propofol. i understand he couldn't sleep but he kind of kill himself in someways because he was the one who kept asking for it when reality it wasn't good for him and they all knew.

What you are saying is basically what that murdering SOB Murray spewed in court. This bastard made it seem as if Michael killed himself. Murray’s complete and utter NEGLIGENCE killed Michael, and that’s the bottomline. Everything that murderer spewed in court was a lie and the jury didn’t believe ANY of it. He should have been charged with SECOND DEGREE MURDER. Michael trusted a HEART SPECIALIST with his life. He didn’t just have any doctor, he had a heart specialist.There is no way in hell that Michael would have trusted this POS if he thought that his life was in danger. Murray convinced Michael that it would be ok. You can bet that Murray did not tell Michael how dangerous this would be. He would never have risked his life if he really knew that Murray would be so careless and negligent. Btw, I will never believe that Michael “begged” for Propofol. Propofol was not a drug and it was not addictive.Seriously, how anyone could believe one utterance from that murderer is beyond me. In case, some of you forget, Murray could have SAVED Michael, but he didn’t monitor him and basically left him alone to die, INTENTIONALLY. That is MURDER!!
IF Murray had monitored Michael, he would still be alive today. It wasn’t Propofol that killed Micharl it was NEGLIGENCE because Murray just let Michael lay there and not monitor how much medicine was going into him. The same thing could happen to you, me or anyone else, if we are not being monitored. Again, Michael would still be alive if only Murray had MONITORED him.
 
Last edited:

Kingofpop4ever3000

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
1,533
Points
0
I’m not happy with the media reporting on the US showing of this. They’re going on and on about the police pictures taken of Michael’s bedroom with those dolls and other things. We all know what they’re implying with that. Disgusting.
 

ScreenOrigami

Proud Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2019
Messages
2,682
Points
48
Kingofpop4ever3000;4304023 said:
I’m not happy with the media reporting on the US showing of this. They’re going on and on about the police pictures taken of Michael’s bedroom with those dolls and other things. We all know what they’re implying with that. Disgusting.

It’s really interesting to see, because I can’t recall the same thing happening when it was broadcast here in Germany.

It also doesn’t do the film justice. In the film, the scene is actually very brief and they don’t dwell on it. The cops mentioned that they thought it was strange considering the allegations, but they also clearly said that the case wasn’t about this, but about Michael as the victim.
 

Kingofpop4ever3000

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
1,533
Points
0
ScreenOrigami;4304025 said:
It’s really interesting to see, because I can’t recall the same thing happening when it was broadcast here in Germany.

It also doesn’t do the film justice. In the film, the scene is actually very brief and they don’t dwell on it. The cops mentioned that they thought it was strange considering the allegations, but they also clearly said that the case wasn’t about this, but about Michael as the victim.


Very true. In all fairness, in the articles I’ve seen, the media dedicated a large paragraph and a half to rehashing the allegations past and present. Then they move on to Michael’s death investigation. But in my opinion, they seem to go overboard as usual talking about the accusations when the detectives mentioned their personal feelings over just a few seconds to just a few minutes about seeing those things. I think the police photographs served as the centerpiece for the articles.
 

ScreenOrigami

Proud Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2019
Messages
2,682
Points
48
Kingofpop4ever3000;4304027 said:
Very true. In all fairness, in the articles I’ve seen, the media dedicated a large paragraph and a half to rehashing the allegations past and present. Then they move on to Michael’s death investigation. But in my opinion, they seem to go overboard as usual talking about the accusations when the detectives mentioned their personal feelings over just a few seconds to just a few minutes about seeing those things. I think the police photographs served as the centerpiece for the articles.

You know, I thought about the film for the last half hour or so, and now I’m not even upset that it gets such a sensationalist press over there. Because if those articles get more people to watch it, that’s actually a good thing.

Michael is shown in a very positive light in the documentary, they chose decent footage of him, they don’t show anything graphic, even the fans aren’t portrayed as crazy like they usually do. It’s a really good documentary that explains the sleeping problems that Michael had, presents all the actual facts of the case, and so on. No one who sees it would suddenly suspect any of the allegations to be true because of the film.

The thing is, when they put the footage for the documentary together, the crime scene simply included the baby pictures and the doll. So they had the choice of either not showing any crime scene footage at all – which would obviously not be the best option, considering it’s a true crime format – or use the footage and say something about the scene. With the allegation history, it simply wouldn’t have been possible to use the footage and not comment on this.

At the beginning of the film, they also explain that Michael was acquitted of all charges in 2005, and there’s nothing in the film that suggests he was guilty anyway. I think they found a good middle ground that doesn’t sway the viewer either way. It’s also just a very brief scene, and the detectives emphasize that it had nothing to do with the case at hand.

The rest of the film comes across as very respectful towards Michael, given the difficult situation. I’d actually highly recommend it to anyone who can handle revisiting those tragic events.

My impressions are based on the version that was shown on German TV earlier this year. Of course, a different version may be shown in the USA. Or they may frame it differently by the way they announce it. We all know how these things can work out.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jan 17, 2004
Messages
5,463
Points
63
Kingofpop4ever3000;4304027 said:
Very true. In all fairness, in the articles I’ve seen, the media dedicated a large paragraph and a half to rehashing the allegations past and present. Then they move on to Michael’s death investigation. But in my opinion, they seem to go overboard as usual talking about the accusations when the detectives mentioned their personal feelings over just a few seconds to just a few minutes about seeing those things. I think the police photographs served as the centerpiece for the articles.

I only saw the photo of the doll, nothing wrong with that at all. So I'm not sure, what did these detectives say overall?
 
Top