Today, Conrad Murray was charged with involuntary manslaughter of the King of Pop, Michael Jackson. Ummm, seriously?
I liked Michael Jackson…before he was white and crazy. He was a very talented musician and then something along the line went horribly wrong in his brain. He got a little weird after that and I kinda lost interest in him at that point.
It was very sad that he died. However, charging the doctor with involuntary manslaughter is pushing it. I honestly would have voted not guilty.
“Involuntary manslaughter is the unlawful killing of a human being without malice aforethought. It is distinguished from voluntary manslaughter by the absence of intention.” –Wikipedia
I do think that it was negligent for the doctor to use an anesthetic medication as a sleeping pill. However, there were so many conflicting stories from that night that I would not have felt comfortable with a guilty verdict on my hands.
Some people in the house said Murray was trying to hide his drugs. others said he panicked and was unable to render aid while still others claim he tried to call for emergency services. There is the issue of the toxicology report since Propofol is barely absorbed into the system and there is the issue of who gave the IV drug, Murray or Jackson. It is not too far-fetched in my mind that Jackson may have done it to himself.
With all these “what-ifs” I would not have voted guilty. I do not feel the prosecution proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that Murray was a killer, involuntary or otherwise. Yes, he did make some dumb choices in my opinion, but does that qualify as manslaughter to me, no. I hope the conviction gets overturned on appeal.
The whole thing makes me wonder if the case were about anyone other than “Michael Jackson’s Killer Doctor”, would there have been a guilty conviction? Was the jury blinded by the “King of Pop” and the fame of the trial? Did Conrad Murray have the fair trial he has a right to receive? What do you think?