Latest on MJJC

I think the family is giving Murray his defense

Sirena said:
But they sure as heck IMPLY it.
Click to expand...



How is it imply, he did have a drug problem. Janet told the truth about that and everyone knows it, so why is this big news. None of these articles said addict or what drugs he had a problem with, so they are reporting what Janet said.

Anyone can imply something with the right word. The statement "sharing your bed with children", comes to mind.

I think some people here are being overly sensitive on this subject.
 
I had a feeling watching the interview that they would focus on Michael is a druggie story. People saying drug use or drug addict it doesn't matter. Basically people think that Michael used drugs all the time when that may not be true.
 
Ramona122003 said:
I just want to point out that none of them said he was an addict. They all simple said he had drug problems, which is partial true. So, I do not see the big deal.
Click to expand...

I understand what you mean. Janet didn't say outright Michael was an addict. But alot of the public see the fact that she said he had problems as some kind of warped confirmation that he was one. It's a snap judgement. And a wrong and sad one to make. They're reading more into it than what is there. And that's a shame. Because Murray's probably going to try and use that to his advantage should this make it to court.
 
Last edited:
Ramona122003 said:
Murray is hardly a danger to society, otherwise they would had arrested him by now for being dangerous to the public. He will never practice again, so him serving jail time will not effect that in either way.

Also, the patience that Murray killed was an honest accident that even the best doctor can do. He was still allow to practice and he didn't no do any jail time, so it was not criminal.

You may hate Murray, but please keep the facts straights on such issues.
Click to expand...


I'm sure the family of the patient who's heart was punctured by Dr. Murray during surgery would disagree with that.

A doctor with a history of dead patients because of his negligence is more than enough to not just revoke his license, but put him/her behind bars.

One death is more than enough proof.
 
Kingofpop4ever3000 said:
I understand what you mean. Janet didn't say outright Michael was an addict. But alot of the public see the fact that she said he had problems as some kind of warped confirmation that he was one.
Click to expand...

Which means "implied."

And that helps Murray's defense.
 
elusive moonwalker said:
from mjjuk


They've already managed to make him look worse than Whitney Houston and she was a hardcore crackhead -- and this with the great help of his own family and Janet just put the final nail.

Why are they doing this? Just look at all the headlines on Google now about her interview:

Janet Jackson: Michael Was in Denial Over Drug Use -- People Magazine

Janet Jackson Says Michael May Have Been 'In Denial' About Drug Problems -- MTV

Janet Jackson Confirms Family Staged Drug Interventions for Michael -- US Magazine

Janet Jackson: Michael in denial over drug problem -- AP

Janet Jackson: We Tried to Save Michael From Drug Use -- American Superstar Magazine

Janet Jackson: We Staged an Intervention for Michael -- Hollyscoop

and many many more like these.

Well, thank you Jackson family, I'm sure Michael appreciates all this great effort you've put in depicting him as a raving druggie.
Click to expand...

yeah we staged an intervention for Michael because he discovered our brother Randy was stealing his money , so we thought he was out of his mind because of drugs . Randy was entitled to the money as everyone in our family but MJ was always selfish .:smilerolleyes:
 
Sirena said:
I'm sure the family of the patient who's heart was punctured by Dr. Murray during surgery would disagree with that.

A doctor with a history of dead patients because of his negligence is more than enough to not just revoke his license, but put him/her behind bars.

One death is more than enough proof.
Click to expand...


As I have said before, even a good doctor can accidentally kill a patient. It happens all the time everyday. He also did not kill the patient by being negligence, it puncture the person's heart during surgery, which can happen quite easily. They are doctors and they make mistakes. It is just their mistake can kill a person.

That has nothing to do with Michael, so it should not be brought up as some bases to add to his charge with Michael. You also do not know how that family feels, so you should not guess.

I have family members who lost their lives to doctors messing up during surgery and we do not blame the doctor. Because, we understand when you go for a proceeder like that, something can go wrong.
 
Ramona122003 said:
Murray is hardly a danger to society, otherwise they would had arrested him by now for being dangerous to the public. ...
Click to expand...

Boy, I see where you're coming from, and agree there's no urgency to get him off the streets. No one expects him to suddenly slit a passerby's throat.

But he's definitely a danger to society, and can't be allowed to be free in the long run, with or without a license to practice. Here's a man in utterly desperate, desperate financial straits, who's proven he will do something utterly unethical to earn a buck, and has expertise to lure the vulnerable. This is an incredibly dangerous combination, and I believe he would find a a next victim the second he ever falls off the radar screen. He's not going to be able to earn enough money legit anymore to get back to where he wants to be. But it's not urgent he be off the streets, because as long as he's in the spotlight, he can't do that kind of harm.
 
Sirena said:
Which means "implied."

And that helps Murray's defense.
Click to expand...


It does not help anything. Michael is already known to have a drug problem. We also went over why it would actually be bad for Michael to be a drug addict in Michael's case.

Janet did not add anything new that we already didn't here, so this is not new. Whoever wants to believe that Michael was an addict has already made up their minds long before Janet talked.
 
Ramona122003 said:
I have family members who lost their lives to doctors messing up during surgery and we do not blame the doctor. Because, we understand when you go for a proceeder like that, something can go wrong.
Click to expand...

That is too sad... it sure must be harder to cope with than a different kind of death...
 
Bo G said:
Boy, I see where you're coming from, and agree there's no urgency to get him off the streets. No one expects him to suddenly slit a passerby's throat.

But he's definitely a danger to society, and can't be allowed to be free in the long run, with or without a license to practice. Here's a man in utterly desperate, desperate financial straits, who's proven he will do something utterly unethical to earn a buck, and has expertise to lure the vulnerable. This is an incredibly dangerous combination, and I believe he would find a a next victim the second he ever falls off the radar screen. He's not going to be able to earn enough money legit anymore to get back to where he wants to be. But it's not urgent he be off the streets, because as long as he's in the spotlight, he can't do that kind of harm.
Click to expand...



He killed Michael Jackson, how in the world will this guy fall off the radar. That is like saying that once John Lennon's killer's gets out of jail he can disappear.

Even if he does get second degree murder, he would most likely serve a couple of years and get out for good behavior, so I fail to follow your point.
 
Ramona122003 said:
As I have said before, even a good doctor can accidentally kill a patient. It happens all the time everyday. He also did not kill the patient by being negligence, it puncture the person's heart during surgery, which can happen quite easily. They are doctors and they make mistakes. It is just their mistake can kill a person.

That has nothing to do with Michael, so it should not be brought up as some bases to add to his charge with Michael. You also do not know how that family feels, so you should not guess.

I have family members who lost their lives to doctors messing up during surgery and we do not blame the doctor. Because, we understand when you go for a proceeder like that, something can go wrong.
Click to expand...

It does has something to do with it because this is a doctor who's been careless before.

Surgery is risky, but you expect the person conducting it to be doing their A+ 1000% best. This is why doctors are respected & paid very well for what they do.

Murray failed on both accounts - and do more lives have to be risked? I think not.

And your relatives have a definite case for a malpractice suit. The doctor IS at fault if they botch up a procedure. It's their job to do it right. Period.
 
Bo G said:
That is too sad... it sure must be harder to cope with than a different kind of death...
Click to expand...


Thank you for your kindness.

We understood when they went under the knife that they may not come back. That is a risk that we all take when we put our lives in someones hands. The doctors did the job the best they could, but they are still human and they can make mistakes. That is human nature, for better and for worst.
 
Ramona122003 said:
He killed Michael Jackson, how in the world will this guy fall off the radar. That is like saying that once John Lennon's killer's gets out of jail he can disappear.

Even if he does get second degree murder, he would most likely serve a couple of years and get out for good behavior, so I fail to follow your point.
Click to expand...


Not for second degree murder. Minimum 15- Maximum Life.
 
Re: Janet Jackson Interview

Bo G said:
I have more experience than I hope to ever have again with family and friends with substance dependence issues. But I have to point out it's not black and white like this, and we don't want to unfairly generalize about people with this problem. A person can be struggling with a dependence, yet still be considered by all a better parenting option than turning children over to strangers.

Also, I was stunned when a family member, who'd been a major alcoholic and lifetime multiple-chemical-abuser over decades, kept proving excellent physical health with no organ damage, including liver. I'd actually kinda hoped for some somewhat scary results that would show him he couldn't keep on this way. But he was very big into a healthy lifestyle in all other respects, and apparently was able to pull it off physically and occupationally. He'd found a weird equilibrium that "worked" for decades. I learned this isn't that unusual, and that his body had recovered from some particularly bad things he'd quit doing. (Obviously there are many ways this did NOT "work.")
Click to expand...

Thanks for your honest response, Bo G. I didn't mean to turn the kids over to strangers, but that another family member should have stepped in. True people can have dependencies on drugs on alcohol and many would not know it. The family did however. I'm not saying she's not telling the truth. But the answer she gave left the door open for many to assume that this was on ongoing thing over a 15-20 year period. Or if it had happened at some low points in his life like during the child molestation allegations in 1993 and 2003. We really don't know what the extent of his problem was later on in his life. But the family volunteering this info is really causing more damage to Michael's legacy than any media outlet could. To me, just my opinion, these statements do nothing to help Michael's image, but to drive a further wedge between the Jackson family and fans.
 
Ramona122003 said:
Kevorkian got 10-to-25-year prison sentence for second-degree murder and he serve 8 because of good behavior.

Wishful thinking again.
Click to expand...

If Murray got charged and convicted for second degree murder there would be no time reduced for good behaviour. Its too risky.
 
Okay, this was a comment I read that someone left on some article somewhere....(lol, sorry =P) Anyway, I thought it was interesting.

In reading this story, which we surely all expected, there remains a glaring subject that is never adequately addressed, and which makes, in my view, a far more convincing argument for manslaughter, or at the very least, medical negligence.

Over and over, I read that Dr. Murray entered the room to find that MJ was not breathing, and began CPR. Anyone who has taken the most basic first aid class knows that one does not perform CPR for someone who has stopped breathing, because chest compressions can be fatal in someone who still has a heartbeat.

I have not read a single report that says that he found MJ "not breathing and without a pulse". I have read the doctor's statement that MJ had a "weak pulse" (another situation in which one would never perform CPR, as the patient still has a heartbeat).

Why is this never adequately addressed, and why do we continually focus on the drug combinations as the sole contributor to his death? Why is this small but critical detail continually brushed aside? I would surely like to know, not only for myself, but in the interest of informing the public about appropriate use of CPR?
Click to expand...
 
terrell said:
It does NOT matter if MJ was a drug addict or not, MURRAY DID WRONG and that is the way it is going to be looked out. He used a drug OUTSIDE of a hospital that should NOT have been used.
Click to expand...


very good point. Can Dr. Murray get his medical lisense away from him for?
Can he even be reprimanded by the state - careerwise?
 
Sirena said:
It does has something to do with it because this is a doctor who's been careless before.

Surgery is risky, but you expect the person conducting it to be doing their A+ 1000% best. This is why doctors are respected & paid very well for what they do.

Murray failed on both accounts - and do more lives have to be risked? I think not.

And your relatives have a definite case for a malpractice suit. The doctor IS at fault if they botch up a procedure. It's their job to do it right. Period.
Click to expand...



They are humans, not robots. You cannot expect a real person to do it right and to be perfect 1000% or even 100% of the time. That is not being realistic and is at best living in a dream world.

Also, what good would malpractice suit do? Will it bring the person back to life, would it rewrite what happen, is it to get revenge on the doctor? My family do not think that way and you have no right to tell us what we should had done.
 
sloride said:
If Murray got charged and convicted for second degree murder there would be no time reduced for good behaviour. Its too risky.
Click to expand...


Too risky for what? Kevorkian actually killed people and has no regrets about it. Also, you can always get out for good behavior, so there is no point in saying it won't happen. He would most likely serve a couple years and let out.

There is noway he would serve a full sentence, no matter how fans feel about it.
 
Kingofpop4ever3000 said:
I understand what you mean. Janet didn't say outright Michael was an addict. But alot of the public see the fact that she said he had problems as some kind of warped confirmation that he was one. It's a snap judgement. And a wrong and sad one to make. They're reading more into it than what is there. And that's a shame. Because Murray's probably going to try and use that to his advantage should this make it to court.
Click to expand...

Totally agree with you and everyone who see it this way. This is why Janet should have been specific as far as timeline, etc. I have been saying all along that ppl should REALLY be careful about the addiction/dependency issue. Can't say it enough. And since the last autopsy leak, I've noticed more ppl being more cautious.

Now, for as much as I took issue with "some" of what Latoya put out there, I give her credit for acknowledging that at the time of Michael's death he appeared to be "clean". Both Janet and Latoya acknowledge Murray's role as the part ultimately responsible so at least they understand what took place. It's just unfortunate that when people aren't clear or specific things can come across in a way that's misleading. Imo, Janet COULD have been more careful...and MAYBE she was but her statements were edited down or whatnot. We know how it goes sometimes when talking to the media. Just look at the headlines. Some of them completely took her opinion out of context.

In any case, I think this thread is pretty top notch. It explores all the avenues and possibilities and how such implications can be harmful or not really a big deal at the end of the day. Lots of great points and insights as far as prosecution and defense. :flowers:

Personally, I feel when all is said and done, what's going to bury Murray, along with all his other missteps, is that he left the room. Whether the experts agree or disagree about propofol being addictive or not, Murray and the defense will NEVER FIND A SINGLE EXPERT who will say it was ever okay for him to leave Michael unattended for one second, much less 2 minutes to go to the toilet...or 45 minutes to make calls....and that's whether Murray wants to say he gave MJ 25mg or an acute amount. Every expert will answer "NO" to the question of whether or not a patient receiving propofol should be left unattended. That will be consistent if nothing else in this case is. Translation: He's toast!

I hope no one offers him a plea deal...and if they do, I hope Murray is dumb enough to reject it.
 
Last edited:
Ramona122003 said:
They are humans, not robots. You cannot expect a real person to do it right and to be perfect 1000% or even 100% of the time. That is not being realistic and is at best living in a dream world.

Also, what good would malpractice suit do? Will it bring the person back to life, would it rewrite what happen, is it to get revenge on the doctor? My family do not think that way and you have no right to tell us what we should had done.
Click to expand...

Well if you don't want me to give an opinion, then why mention it within a reply of my very own comment?

I wish your family the best regardless.

EDIT: I disagree, doctors are expected to perform at their 1000% best because of the risks. There is no excuse. Just like a pilot who flies an airplane. No excuse for them to do a bad job. Lives depend on them.
 
Ramona122003 said:
Kevorkian got 10-to-25-year prison sentence for second-degree murder and he serve 8 because of good behavior.

Wishful thinking again.
Click to expand...

Kevorkian got out early because of his illness (Hepatitis C) - and good behavior. Doctors thought he'd die in 2007, but the guy's still standing.
 
Sirena said:
Well if you don't want me to give an opinion, then why mention it within a reply of my very own comment?

I wish your family the best regardless.

EDIT: I disagree, doctors are expected to perform at their 1000% best because of the risks. There is no excuse. Just like a pilot who flies an airplane. No excuse for them to do a bad job. Lives depend on them.
Click to expand...


Once again, human error will happen no matter how good or hard you try to avoid it. Tell me, do you do you job 100% or 1000% correctly every time. I am going to guess no, but then you are going to say that you are not a doctor or pilot.

Unless you are going to tell me that doctors and pilots are super human who are beyond the limits of humans and can do their job perfect under any circumstances, it does not work.

The are still a person and they make mistakes, even if a life is on the line. So, stop acting like they are some kind of machine that does everything perfectly.
 
Ramona122003 said:
The are still a person and they make mistakes, even if a life is on the line. So, stop acting like they are some kind of machine that does everything perfectly.
Click to expand...

They are not machines, but they cannot have room for error. People die when they make mistakes.
 
Sirena said:
Kevorkian got out early because of his illness (Hepatitis C) - and good behavior. Doctors thought he'd die in 2007, but the guy's still standing.
Click to expand...


He still only serve 8 years of his sentence and plenty of people die in jail of illnesses, so they didn't have to let him off. Also for reference, he was originally charge with first-degree murder, but only got the second-degree. So, that rates him more dangerous than Murray.

Granted, he the people may asked to die, but he did it during the time when he didn't have a medical license.
 
wendy2004 said:
Totally agree with you and everyone who see it this way. This is why Janet should have been specific as far as timeline, etc. I have been saying all along that ppl should REALLY be careful about the addiction/dependency issue. Can't say it enough. And since the last autopsy leak, I've noticed more ppl being more cautious.

Now, for as much as I took issue with "some" of what Latoya put out there, I give her credit for acknowledging that at the time of Michael's death he appeared to be "clean". Both Janet and Latoya acknowledge Murray's role as the part ultimately responsible so at least they understand what took place. It's just unfortunate that when people aren't clear or specific things can come across in a way that's misleading. Imo, Janet COULD have been more careful...and MAYBE she was but her statements were edited down or whatnot. We know how it goes sometimes when talking to the media. Just look at the headlines. Some of them completely took her opinion out of context.

In any case, I think this thread is pretty top notch. It explores all the avenues and possibilities and how such implications can be harmful or not really a big deal at the end of the day. Lots of great points and insights as far as prosecution and defense. :flowers:

Personally, I feel when all is said and done, what's going to bury Murray, along with all his other missteps, is that he left the room. Whether the experts agree or disagree about propofol being addictive or not, Murray and the defense will NEVER FIND A SINGLE EXPERT who will say it was ever okay for him to leave Michael unattended for one second, much less 2 minutes to go to the toilet...or 45 minutes to make calls....and that's whether Murray wants to say he gave MJ 25mg or an acute amount. Every expert will answer "NO" to the question of whether or not a patient receiving propofol should be left unattended. That will be consistent if nothing else in this case is. Translation: He's toast!

I hope no one offers him a plea deal...and if they do, I hope Murray is dumb enough to reject it.
Click to expand...

Agree with this post !!!!!
 
Sirena said:
They are not machines, but they cannot have room for error. People die when they make mistakes.
Click to expand...


Yeah, because they are still human. You may want them to be more, but they cannot despite all the years of medical training. So even if you got the best doctor in the world, they can still mess up.

When you take any job when you responsible for someone's life, you have to be prepare for the possibility that you may accidentally kill someone.

I remember watching TLC a week about when a pilot and copilot lost control of their plane and it crash. They did everything they could to save it and the manage to save 50 people out of 150. The pilot felt terrible about the accident and blame himself.

Years later, he met with one of the survivors and apologize for no being able to saver her husband. The woman said to be quiet and that God wanted him and it was his will. That set the pilot free from his guilt.

Although not a doctor, this logic applies to anyone who goes into a field where loves are in human's hands.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top