(Whether or not administering propofol in a home setting would be seen as unlawful or not, I don't know. Maybe it would be seen as administering is a "lawful act" and the home setting or not having the right equipment would be seen as "an unlawful manner or without due caution and circumspection". I have no idea, maybe someone here could clear that up?)
To my best knowledge unfortunately it is not an unlawful act. At the time of MJ's death propofol was not a controlled substance. Yes it is not appropriate to use it in a home setting without necessary precautions but as far as the law goes a doctor can prescribe, get and use it. (However they are changing the law for this).
second degree is cali doesnt need malice. they have a special clause. gross disregard for human life.
I'm doubtful if this is actually true. I did some digging in california law and I cannot find such clause. Can somebody give me a link etc that states this clause?
The below are from california penal code. Murder requires expressed or implied malice by definition.
CALIFORNIA PENAL CODE
SECTION 187-199
187.
Murder is the unlawful killing of a human being, or a fetus, with
malice aforethought.
188. Such
malice may be express or implied. It is express when there is manifested a deliberate intention unlawfully to take away the life of a fellow creature. It is implied, when no considerable provocation appears, or when the circumstances attending the killing show an abandoned and malignant heart.
192.
Manslaughter is the unlawful killing of a human being without malice. It is of three kinds:
(a) Voluntary--upon a sudden quarrel or heat of passion.
(b) Involuntary--in the commission of an unlawful act, not amounting to felony; or in the commission of a lawful act which might produce death, in an unlawful manner, or w
ithout due caution and circumspection.
(c) Vehicular
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/di...0&file=187-199
From California Jury Simplified Definitions..- IVMS includes gross negligence
Involuntary manslaughter is an unintentional killing that happened during the commission of a misdemeanor or because of
gross negligence (carelessness)
From California Jury Instructions Sheet - IVMS, without murder charge details - pg 450
To prove that the defendant is guilty of this crime, the People must prove that:
1. The defendant (committed a crime that posed a high risk of death or great bodily injury because of the way in which it was committed/ [or] committed a lawful act, but acted with criminal negligence);
AND
2. The defendant’s acts caused the death of another person.
Criminal negligence involves more than ordinary carelessness, inattention, or mistake in judgment. A person acts with criminal negligence when:
1. He or she acts in a reckless way that creates a high risk of death or great bodily injury;
AND
2. A reasonable person would have known that acting in that way would create such a risk.
http://courtinfo.ca.gov/jury/criminaljuryinstructions/calcrim_juryins.pdf
The above document is a large document (with 2500 pages and slow to load) but if you search for second degree murder, all different types lists intent, conspiracy or abiding etc. similarly conscious disregard lists intent as well as a required condition. please correct me if I'm wrong.
btw I think that the main argument for Second Degree Murder is that you can charge for it by stating implied malice. Implied malice is a behavior that would surely cause a certain death in every instance that action is done.
