Latest on MJJC

Outcome of the trial: All news stories and discussion about guilty/not guilty and possible jail time

What's Conrad's future ?

  • convicted to murder, he'll spend his life in jail

    Votes: 12 10.9%

  • more than 36 years in jail

    Votes: 1 0.9%

  • 21 to 35 years in jail

    Votes: 2 1.8%

  • 11 to 20 years in jail

    Votes: 3 2.7%

  • 1 to 10 years in jail

    Votes: 72 65.5%

  • he'll be fully cleared

    Votes: 20 18.2%
  • Total voters
    110
Re: could Murray get more than four yrs prison time?

I don't think so. I think California law states 2-4 years inprisonment together with additional charges of $10k fine & professional disciplinary action. If the pros wanted higher charges they would need to prove them beyond reasonable doubt. 4 years is the most realistic sentence we can hope for.

http://www.shouselaw.com/involuntary_manslaughter.html#3
 
Re: could Murray get more than four yrs prison time?

I have heard of cases where the maximum was one thing and the judge thought the acts of the person were so terrible that they gave them more than the maximum. However, these are rare occassions. I also don't know what criteria makes this allowable.

Sorry!
 
Re: could Murray get more than four yrs prison time?

Charges are tied to penalties, i.e. maximum sentences. I think the only way he could get MORE jail time would be if some NEW crime were discovered, and he was tried for THAT? Much as I dislike Nancy Grace, I was watching her last night on HLN, and she was actually RANTING about "how the charges are too light!" She had a panel of attorneys to explore this topic. Basically, she said the D.A. was "gutless" and afraid to take a risk, and that under California law Murray could have been charged with Murder 2, with instructions to the jury that he could be found guilty on a lesser charge. (Hence, the petition that was circulated here several months ago. Some folks were afraid that with a higher charge, Murray could walk, but that ignored the idea that jury instructions could have ALSO included the right to convict on lesser charges! Well, oops?) I STILL maintain the charges are too light, and are limiting of the penalties that Murray DESERVES. Nancy G. said that, "He could get off with only probation!" (odd to see her supporting MIchael in this one, but . there you have it.) Of course, it's too late to change the charges, now!
 
Re: could Murray get more than four yrs prison time?

Is it too late to change the charges? I mean if they discover something during the trail can they change the charges against him? How does that work?
 
Re: could Murray get more than four yrs prison time?

jilliebean said:
Is it too late to change the charges? I mean if they discover something during the trail can they change the charges against him? How does that work?
Click to expand...

it's too late to change charges. only way to do it is to drop the charges and recharge him and go through all the process (starting from preliminary hearing) again.
 
Re: could Murray get more than four yrs prison time?

ivy said:
it's too late to change charges. only way to do it is to drop the charges and recharge him and go through all the process (starting from preliminary hearing) again.
Click to expand...

Right. It's too late, unless NEW and significant evidence is uncovered. (that is extremely unlikely at this late date)

The HLN coverage is predictably -- deplorable. However, Nancy Grace's take on the trial has been surprising. I think she still thinks he's guilty of m#lestation, but she said this is not about her OPINION of that, but of the trial that is about to start. She is VERY critical of the D.A. and the "light charges," as she perceives them to be. She said it would have been perfectly possible to charge Murray with Murder 2, with instructions to the jury that they could convict on a lesser charge, including one in the Manslaughter range. The panels of attorneys she's had on, seem to agree with her estimation of "light charges." There is absolutely NOTHING that can be done about it now, unless, as Ivy said, the entire case is opened up again and procedures repeated. That would be next to impossible, unless some new, hard, evidence is uncovered. And I can't imagine that that could happen at this late date. It just is what it is, now.
 
Re: could Murray get more than four yrs prison time?

Urgh to actually agree with her.although i doubt her opinion is sincere. its whatever gets ratings and creates hype
 
Re: could Murray get more than four yrs prison time?

No, it cannot be higher than four years. If they want to extend it they'd have to bring more charges and add it to his sentence after a trial.
 
Re: could Murray get more than four yrs prison time?

US justice sucks!
 
Re: could Murray get more than four yrs prison time?

I think had they initially came out with a Murder charge, they'd have a case in court. The DA didn't think so and thought it was too much of a risk, with the evidence they had at the time. Unfortunately, 4 years is the most he can get for his current charge, I believe it.
 
Re: could Murray get more than four yrs prison time?

thanks everyone for your replies. I dreamt last night cm got 10yrs! I can dream.
 
Re: could Murray get more than four yrs prison time?

ginvid said:
Here is a story of a woman who was given more time than the maximum allowed.

http://www.nytimes.com/1996/07/11/n...rch-treasurer-more-than-maximum-sentence.html

I don't know the circumstances of the case, or why this was allowed, or why the judge did it. I just know it happens on a rare occasion.
Click to expand...

Interesting. It doesn't say if this was a jury trial, or one held only before a judge? It was Federal court. Not sure if that makes a difference? I think the bottom-line is a JUDGE does have some discretion, but upping the sentence beyond what the charges dictate would be extremely rare, and no doubt grounds for a forceful appeal?

Much as I hate to say it, in this, Nancy Grace seemed sincere, and seemed to be able to separate whatever she may think of Michael personally, and the legalities involved in the Murray trial. As a former prosecutor, she has some authority to have the opinion that the charges were WEAK. She as much as said that the prosecutor lacked, uhm, two significant components of male anatomy? :swoon:
 
Re: could Murray get more than four yrs prison time?

Autumn II said:
Right. It's too late, unless NEW and significant evidence is uncovered. (that is extremely unlikely at this late date)

The HLN coverage is predictably -- deplorable. However, Nancy Grace's take on the trial has been surprising. I think she still thinks he's guilty of m#lestation, but she said this is not about her OPINION of that, but of the trial that is about to start. She is VERY critical of the D.A. and the "light charges," as she perceives them to be. She said it would have been perfectly possible to charge Murray with Murder 2, with instructions to the jury that they could convict on a lesser charge, including one in the Manslaughter range. The panels of attorneys she's had on, seem to agree with her estimation of "light charges." There is absolutely NOTHING that can be done about it now, unless, as Ivy said, the entire case is opened up again and procedures repeated. That would be next to impossible, unless some new, hard, evidence is uncovered. And I can't imagine that that could happen at this late date. It just is what it is, now.
Click to expand...



I have to agree. I am surprised by Grace's opinion on this case. Nevertheless, I think she is right. I have always believed that the charges should have been tougher because Murray knew better than to do something like that. His knowledge of how to do things the right way is evidenced by his other patients giving interviews talking about how he was the perfect doctor for them. If that's the case to them, then he had to know better than to give Michael such a risky substance come heck or high water let alone pile it on top of all the other medicines that were already in Michael's system. This is all just my opinion.
 
Last edited:
Re: could Murray get more than four yrs prison time?

I think N.G has a one track mind, If you're charged then you're guilty full stop....no matter who you are.
 
Re: could Murray get more than four yrs prison time?

She also explained how the "malice" necessary for a Murder 2 charge could have worked. I don't think it's being said that Murray had "malice" toward Michael in that he acted (or failed to act) deliberately. But in this instance, the EXTREME negligence, the phone calls, the attempts to conceal evidence, could be construed as "malice" in that he didn't care about Michael's LIFE, at all, and was over-the-top negligent. I still wish Murder 2 could have been charged, but it is what it is now.
 
If people blindly respected any unfair law out there, whatever the country, we would still live in the Middle Ages. Criticizing, and accepting criticisms, when it's justified and constructive, is the only way to make a positive change.
Georgia and CA may be 2 different states, they are both part of the same country. They might have different laws, I doubt it justifies the acceptance of double standards when it comes to justice. We live in one same world. If we agree on signing petitions to abolish cruel laws and injustice in other countries we consider "underdeveloped", it's only fair we accept to also look in our own backyards. All countries are still works in progress.
 
I looked at this website:

http://www.ehow.com/way_5185339_involuntary-manslaughter-sentencing-guidelines.html

If the conviction for involuntary manslaughter did not occur in a federal, but in a state court, the federal sentencing guidelines don't apply. State sentencing varies considerably, but the general elements are the same as in the federal courts, though usually a bit more severe. Some states, such as California, use discriminate sentencing, which means sentences are mandated for low, middle, and high severity. The judge only has discretion to choose which level, and must order the sentence proscribed for that level. Involuntary manslaughter carries a sentence of either 24, 36, or 48 months in California, depending on the judge's determination of the severity.

Read more: Involuntary Manslaughter Sentencing Guidelines | eHow.com http://www.ehow.com/way_5185339_involuntary-manslaughter-sentencing-guidelines.html#ixzz1Z6nQoBct
Click to expand...

These are just the guidelines though. This article states that those are the guidelines. According to this article here:

http://writ.news.findlaw.com/allenbaugh/20050114.html

Based on a court case in 2004 and 2005, it was decided that :
The second majority gave an unexpected answer: The Guidelines will now become merely advisory. And that means that the only laws truly constraining the sentences judge can impose, will be the laws setting down statutory maximums and minimums for a particular offense. (Note, however, that, as I discussed in a previous column, the continuing constitutionality of mandatory minimums remains questionable).

Thus, the Guidelines - which help judges chooses a sentence in the wide range between a given statutory maximum, and a given statutory minimum - will become a source a judge can look at, but choose to ignore. While courts still must "consider" the Guidelines, they need not follow them.

(Notably, the effect of this holding is to gut the PROTECT Act of 2003 - which I discussed in another column for this site. That Act had greatly limited judges' authority to depart below sentencing guidelines minimums. It had also subjected such departures to de novo review - that is, review without deference to the trial court. Now, judges can depart below sentencing guidelines minimums - and exceed sentencing guidelines maximums -- as a matter of course; the only minimums and maximums they must worry about are those in the statutes connected to the specific offenses of which the defendant was convicted.)
Click to expand...

The statutory maximum for IVM is 8 years, according to this: http://www.justice.gov/usao/nd/pressreleases/2011/04-15-2011-Bigtrack pleads.pdf
However I saw other internet pages that said the maximum statutory was 6 years up from 3 years.

Therefore, it appears to me that a judge could give the maximum guideline sentence of 48 months in CA or if he found other aggravating circumstances, he could surpass the guideline max as long as he does not surpass the statutory max of 6 years. I think that is how judges can give higher than the sentencing guidelines. However, a person rarely gets the maximum according to the guidelines, let alone the max statutory.

Hopefully someone can explain this information. I just posted what I found and I could be totally wrong. (But it would be awesome if not and the judge saw fit to give Murray more than the 4 yrs.)
I put in a text mess to my friend who practices law. But she is always so busy and is slow to return calls. So we will see.
 
Re: could Murray get more than four yrs prison time?

Autumn II said:
Charges are tied to penalties, i.e. maximum sentences. I think the only way he could get MORE jail time would be if some NEW crime were discovered, and he was tried for THAT? Much as I dislike Nancy Grace, I was watching her last night on HLN, and she was actually RANTING about "how the charges are too light!" She had a panel of attorneys to explore this topic. Basically, she said the D.A. was "gutless" and afraid to take a risk, and that under California law Murray could have been charged with Murder 2, with instructions to the jury that he could be found guilty on a lesser charge. (Hence, the petition that was circulated here several months ago. Some folks were afraid that with a higher charge, Murray could walk, but that ignored the idea that jury instructions could have ALSO included the right to convict on lesser charges! Well, oops?) I STILL maintain the charges are too light, and are limiting of the penalties that Murray DESERVES. Nancy G. said that, "He could get off with only probation!" (odd to see her supporting MIchael in this one, but . there you have it.) Of course, it's too late to change the charges, now!
Click to expand...

I've been trying to convince myself the lighter charges were chosen for a good reason.I've been listening to everyone saying how it's so hard to convict a Dr. of Murder 2 and why the logical thing was to choose manslaughter,but I haven't been able to force myself to believe it and be at peace with it.I agree with you and...ugh! who would have thought,with NG on this one.

It is what it is now,though,so we must remain strong and hope for the best.

Ginvid,thanks for all that info.Hopefully someone can tell us if that would be possible in this case.
 
I try not to be negative.........


But I just have a terrible feeling that the doctor will walk free :no:
 
I think he'll just get away with it, to be honest. I don't believe in justice in this world anymore but I do believe in justice in the hands of God. So he will pay, someday.
 
Krshna28 said:
I try not to be negative.........


But I just have a terrible feeling that the doctor will walk free :no:
Click to expand...


I am thinking the same thing. I am sorry. But personally, I don't see why I should hope for a "guilty" verdict in this case. In my opinion, if a fully-grown medical professional can have a lapse in ethical judgement, show a tragic failure to meet the utmost principals for the standard of proper medical care and then simply blame his dead celebrity patient for everything just because the patient was a celebrity. then I do not believe that there is any reason for me to think that justice will prevail for Michael. I try to convince myself that Murray will go to jail. But in my heart, I don't believe that will be the case. I have no faith in anyone anymore in regards to Michael Jackson. None.
 
Last edited:
I voted for:1 to 10 years in jail. If he does get 4 years when I think he will be out in 2 years or less! I think it will end up being: he'll be fully cleared. What I wanted it to be: convicted to murder, he'll spend his life in jail!!
 
Justice seems to be a fucking lost concept in this world of rampant violations, lies, and greed. I have little to no faith in the system and have a sinking feeling that Murray will be freed.

:(
 
I don't see how he could be cleared, looking at the mountain of damning evidence and clear wrongdoing on his part. Since it is a manslaughter, and not a murder case in proper, it will be easier to convict him since no intent of malice is needed, just clear negligence and recklessness, which Murray happens to have in heaps.

Do I wish he could rot in jail for the remainder of his mortal existence? Yes. Looking at it that way, a manslaughter conviction is a laugh. However, it's better than nothing, and I'm sort of hoping his sentence is "shortened" by the other inmates.
 
Frollo_Judge_by_Arnumdrusk.jpg
 
I have complete faith this jury will fin Dr Murray Guilty as charged. nothing the defense can bring forward can delete Murrays dispicable actions on June 25th. There is NO excuse .. The defence is even burring itself with their questions. Even if they could some how prove Michael self injected which they cant. According to the charge Murray will still be held accountable for drugging Michael up and leaving meds available to him in his incapacitated state where he wouldnt be thinking clearly. That would be Murrays fault. The fact it was stated if he only called 911 Michael would still be alive. That is one of the major nails in his coffin besides administering the lethal injections and leaving his patient. Murray doesnt have a leg to stand on. anything the defense bring on the prosecution will shoot them down. I have faith in their ability. Murray will be found GUILTY AS CHARGED.
 
qbee said:
i have complete faith this jury will fin dr murray guilty as charged. Nothing the defense can bring forward can delete murrays dispicable actions on june 25th. There is no excuse .. The defence is even burring itself with their questions. Even if they could some how prove michael self injected which they cant. According to the charge murray will still be held accountable for drugging michael up and leaving meds available to him in his incapacitated state where he wouldnt be thinking clearly. That would be murrays fault. The fact it was stated if he only called 911 michael would still be alive. That is one of the major nails in his coffin besides administering the lethal injections and leaving his patient. Murray doesnt have a leg to stand on. Anything the defense bring on the prosecution will shoot them down. I have faith in their ability. Murray will be found guilty as charged.
Click to expand...
:clapping:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top