Conrad Murray (Michael Jackson) Trial: What’s the Defense?Posted: September 1, 2011
What is the defense in the Michael Jackson (Conrad Murray) Manslaughter trial? Let’s review the defenses trial balloons so far. Michael is an addict. Maybe so, and if so, should you a doctor be giving more drugs to an addict? How does that help Dr. Murray? Michael was acquitted of child molest. Yes, and how is that relevant to his death? Drugs were found in a raid at Neverland. Ok, so what? Many doctors gave or injected Michael with drugs. Again, should a doctor be giving Michael more drugs? How does that help Dr. Murray? “Not relevant” according to Judge Pastor, that’s legal speak for the big “SO WHAT, IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS CASE! ” Can we fault the defense for trying all avenues? But, at some point, doesn’t it weaken your case and/or your credibility? And, maybe, the strategy backfires and creates more sympathy for Michael.
Michael injected himself with the lethal drug. Is that the defense? Where is the evidence? Bottles of the stuff were near his bed, the defense intimated at the preliminary hearing. Really, does that help Dr. Murray? Wouldn’t that put a doctor on notice that drug accessibility and use may be a problem? Dr. Murray isn’t charged with murder, intending to kill Michael. He is charged with involuntary manslaughter, to paraphrase, “an unlawful killing by an unintentional act”. Is giving Michael the propopfol just before his death enough to convict? Let’s assume the possible defense of two doses, will this case be about which dose killed Michael? Or, will the jury say “SO WHAT”, the act of a doctor giving a dangerous drug to Michael is enough to convict?
Simply my opinion, WHAT SAY YOU?