Latest on MJJC

I think the family is giving Murray his defense

Bo G said:
Yes, we're OK here, agreed. Just noting that another thread has been closed because of this "Janet war." And noting that saying she's completely betrayed her brother, while said here civilly, could certainly be construed as an attack.
Click to expand...

People need to put their emotions aside, because no one is attacking Janet nor anyone. I adore Janet, I LOVE Janet, but I think her statements help Murray's defense, just like the original poster Yaaz said.

I agree that there are some super-sensitive members that claim someone is attacking another over the most trivial things. It's quite annoying.

We have to remain rational & open to discussing different points of view, otherwise we will never grow from having such a great forum such as this.
 
ReneeM said:
What in the world happened here? Too funny.

You paid no attention at all to what I wrote. Too funny

Sure his past drug usage could have something to do with the present. Past drug use can make insomnia worse because conventional drugs don't have the same effect and the person looks for something stronger. That is not blaming him( why do you guys keep saying that?)

I have the DVD of the History tour, I don't need to watch youtube clips. Remember, he had an anesthesiologist with him to administer the Propofol. Murray was not qualified to dispense that drug. I don't disagree with that and never said otherwise.

Please try to understand what I'm saying before jumping to wrong conclusions.
Click to expand...


No one static. A man has the right to change.

P.S: By the way whether you have the DVD or watches it on youtube; my point doesn't change. You can't shove your TINI agenda down peoples throat; when facts (autopsy) contradict the drug addict (recent) claims
 
Sirena said:
People need to put their emotions aside, because no one is attacking Janet nor anyone. I adore Janet, I LOVE Janet, but I think her statements help Murray's defense, just like the original poster Yaaz said.

I agree that there are some super-sensitive members that claim someone is attacking another over the most trivial things. It's quite annoying.

We have to remain rational & open to discussing different points of view, otherwise we will never grow from having such a great forum such as this.
Click to expand...

exactly.
 
yaazgurl said:
By constantly talking about Michael being on drugs and failed interventions and not making it clear that Michael wasn't apparently on anything other than what Murray gave him when he died. According to the autopsy, his organs were not damaged by years of drug use but the media wants to portray a drug addict and the family goes along with it. They are giving Murray a defense and giving the potential jury reasonable doubt.
Click to expand...


I disagree - you're incriminating Janets words. You dont know exactly why they were interviening. You have to remember, Michael used to be against drugs of any kind and for the family to see him in seclusion and seemingly not as he should be, or taking anything for any extended period of time, they would be concerned. It doesnt mean he was a drug addict, but he must have been doing SOMETHING that would cause concern.

This is a no brainer. Michael was using Propofal against professional advisement, knowing the dangers - and told "you thing I would do something that would leave my children without a father?" WELLLLLLL...um...YEAH! And thats not to say Michael was doing something bad - but he obviously disregarded the warnings and thought he wouldnt fall victem to its dangerous side - trusting people..because it worked before without trouble...only thing is he had an idiot watching him. He was in denial about how dangerous it was indeed. This is not the type of escapism Michael needed. I wish things were different - Im sure if you had a brother you would be concerned for him too.

But back to Janet - Im sure she wouldnt be saying things for no good reason. Come on - but it doesnt excuse Murray in any way, shape or form....
 
Sirena said:
... the Jackson Family need to shut it DOWN and stay quiet.
Click to expand...

It seems you've made your point repeatedly already... at some point this intensifying hammering becomes intimidation of others in the thread...
 
Pascal09 said:
Having evidence doesn't mean sh*t; all that matters is a reason doubt and murray will be a free man. As Cocran will say "if it doesn't fit, the you must acquit". If if Murray is convicted, he will have a reduce sentence (2-5 years maybe) due to the blame being levelled against MJ. The family is doing too much damage.
Click to expand...


If you read the all the posts here, you will already know why that is unlikely.

He is a doctor. Even if Michael got on his knees and beg for the damn drug, he had a responsibility to say no. He should had either walk away or got him help. Or at least someone who was actually trained to give him the drug. If they paint Michael as an addict, Murray would just be a glorified drug dealing who cared more about his paycheck then the life of his patient. No jury would have support someone like that.

Kevorkian had a more valid excuse than Murray and still served 8 years in prison. Also, OJ was a bad case because the physical evident was mess up, so that is a poor example. This case has enough physical evident to hang Murray and even if it didn't, look at the paragraph above.
 
Bo G said:
It seems you've made your point repeatedly already... at some point this intensifying hammering becomes intimidation of others in the thread...
Click to expand...

I'm not alone in this sentiment though - and I was agreeing with what that person said.
 
Sirena said:
People need to put their emotions aside
Click to expand...

My statement wasn't about emotion. While I think Janet is talented and I enjoy her artistry, in no way could I be called a fan.

Really, no need to keep harping on my tiny attempt at levity.
 
Pascal09 said:
No one static. A man has the right to change.

P.S: By the way whether you have the DVD or watches it on youtube; my point doesn't change. You can't shove your TINI agenda down peoples throat; when facts (autopsy) contradict the drug addict (recent) claims
Click to expand...

You are so funny. I am not TINI, I don't agree with them and never have. How you came to that conclusion is indeed puzzling.

Of course he has a right to change and chances are he did change. If he had a drug dependency in the past doesn't mean that he still has a drug problem. I never said that. I'm saying that past drug usage does create a physiological tolerance to other drugs and this could have been why he chose Propofol. Again, this is not saying that this was all Michael's fault. I do agree that Murray was incompetent and deserves all the blame.
 
jaXXXon said:
I disagree - you're incriminating Janets words. You dont know exactly why they were interviening. You have to remember, Michael used to be against drugs of any kind and for the family to see him in seclusion and seemingly not as he should be, or taking anything for any extended period of time, they would be concerned. It doesnt mean he was a drug addict, but he must have been doing SOMETHING that would cause concern.

This is a no brainer. Michael was using Propofal against professional advisement, knowing the dangers - and told "you thing I would do something that would leave my children without a father?" WELLLLLLL...um...YEAH! And thats not to say Michael was doing something bad - but he obviously disregarded the warnings and thought he wouldnt fall victem to its dangerous side - trusting people..because it worked before without trouble...only thing is he had an idiot watching him. He was in denial about how dangerous it was indeed. This is not the type of escapism Michael needed. I wish things were different - Im sure if you had a brother you would be concerned for him too.

But back to Janet - Im sure she wouldnt be saying things for no good reason. Come on - but it doesnt excuse Murray in any way, shape or form....
Click to expand...



He actually said he would not do anything to put his kids in danger.

Also, Propofal is safe when done correctly. Any medicine can be dangerous if abuse or used incorrect, so even if Michael said the above quote he was not lying. I do not think he was in denial, but more that he had a doctor watching him and if anything goes wrong he would saved him. Is that not what all of us think when we have a doctor watching him.

Although, I agree with everything else you said.
 
Sirena said:
I'm not alone in this sentiment though - and I was agreeing with what that person said.
Click to expand...

What does that matter -- more people hammering in unison against other hammerers is not any better.
 
I'm sorry I'm a little confused here so if someone could please explain to me; how does janet's statement help murray's defense?
she basically said that he's responsible for michael's death, and that he shouldn't be allowed to continue this way in risk of hurting someone else.
 
Ramona122003 said:
If you read the all the posts here, you will already know why that is unlikely.

He is a doctor. Even if Michael got on his knees and beg for the damn drug, he had a responsibility to say no. He should had either walk away or got him help. Or at least someone who was actually trained to give him the drug. If they paint Michael as an addict, Murray would just be a glorified drug dealing who cared more about his paycheck then the life of his patient. No jury would have support someone like that.

Kevorkian had a more valid excuse than Murray and still served 8 years in prison. Also, OJ was a bad case because the physical evident was mess up, so that is a poor example. This case has enough physical evident to hang Murray and even if it didn't, look at the paragraph above.
Click to expand...

If the prosecution paints Murray as a "glorified drug dealer" - then the defense will plea bargain that Murray did get propofol to MJ and accept a lesser degree manslaughter charge. Murray gets the slap on the wrist, pays a fine, maybe does some jail at a Club-Fed type prison for the drug charges and walks out of jail in less than 2 years.

If the prosecution paints Murray as a butcher who grossly neglected his patient and his oath as a doctor, while pumping him with massive amounts of propofol and killed his patient, then Murray can be charged with a heavier indictment (which is what I'd like to see happen.)
 
jaXXXon said:
I disagree - you're incriminating Janets words. You dont know exactly why they were interviening. You have to remember, Michael used to be against drugs of any kind and for the family to see him in seclusion and seemingly not as he should be, or taking anything for any extended period of time, they would be concerned. It doesnt mean he was a drug addict, but he must have been doing SOMETHING that would cause concern.

This is a no brainer. Michael was using Propofal against professional advisement, knowing the dangers - and told "you thing I would do something that would leave my children without a father?" WELLLLLLL...um...YEAH! And thats not to say Michael was doing something bad - but he obviously disregarded the warnings and thought he wouldnt fall victem to its dangerous side - trusting people..because it worked before without trouble...only thing is he had an idiot watching him. He was in denial about how dangerous it was indeed. This is not the type of escapism Michael needed. I wish things were different - Im sure if you had a brother you would be concerned for him too.

But back to Janet - Im sure she wouldnt be saying things for no good reason. Come on - but it doesnt excuse Murray in any way, shape or form....
Click to expand...

the talk about the intervention started after mj had a rift with Randy , 13 days after news about mj accusing Randy of plotting against him surfaced , Roger wrote an article talking about his very much damaged liver because of alcohol and painkillers and the family trying to get Mez to step and help them meet MJ , Roger said he did not see anyone of them in almost two years and the family was trying to hold an intervention .


later all Katherine, Tito, Marlon , Jackie and Jermain released a statement refuting that rumour but Randy and Janet did not sign it .

the seclusion had nothing to do with drugs, mj did not want any contact with them at that time because he discovered his younger brother had screwed up his financial life , and the siblings had already hired Rowe as manager and Janet wanted to open up for them .

again they called when they wanted something , not out of concern
 
Sirena said:
If the prosecution paints Murray as a "glorified drug dealer" - then the defense will plea bargain that Murray did get propofol to MJ and accept a lesser degree manslaughter charge. Murray gets the slap on the wrist, pays a fine, maybe does some jail at a Club-Fed type prison for the drug charges and walks out of jail in less than 2 years.

If the prosecution paints Murray as a butcher who grossly neglected his patient and his oath as a doctor, while pumping him with massive amounts of propofol and killed his patient, then Murray can be charged with a heavier indictment (which is what I'd like to see happen.)
Click to expand...


I have already said why this is unlikely in any event. I heavily doubt second degree murder is even on their minds.

Also, there is no way you can paint Murray as a butcher, no matter how much you do like him. Most likely, he will plea-bargain and get a lesser change since any defense makes him look bad.
 
Ramona122003 said:
I have already said why this is unlikely in any event. I heavily doubt second degree murder is even on their minds.

Also, there is no way you can paint Murray as a butcher, no matter how much you do like him. Most likely, he will plea-bargain and get a lesser change since any defense makes him look bad.
Click to expand...

Oh I don't like Murray at all, whatever gave you that idea?

Only the LA County DA will know whether to paint Murray as the "glorified drug dealer" or the "butcher." And the DA is the one who makes the decision of offering a plea deal - the defense can offer it, but ultimately the DA will decide.

And I really hope that the DA won't enter a plea deal with Murray, unless there is compelling evidence that can tie another person as a co-conspirator that forced Murray to act the way he did.
 
MJ died long before the paramedics arrived , Murray's actions that morning before and after Mike's death are what going to get him convicted of second degree murder .


the prosecution and defense calling MJ an addict is a minor issue to them , the bigger issue will be how the defense is going to explain Murray's actions or lack of actions after he found MJ in dire need of help .

the whole case now is about whether murray tried to help or pushed mj over the edge that morning . their will be no debate whether he was an addict or not . Both of them have already agreed on calling him a 'healthy junkie'.
 
Ramona122003 said:
Most likely, he will plea-bargain and get a lesser change since any defense makes him look bad.
Click to expand...

:wild: Oh, dear, Ramona, don't tell me this! :) I do hope this long delay means LAPD is not interested in plea-bargaining, but I know very little about such things. I really NEED them to go for the jugular here!

That's an interesting point... any defense does make him look bad, doesn't it? So I think you could be right that he'll try hard for the plea-bargain. I'm hopin' LAPD ain't buyin' it.
 
ReneeM said:
You are so funny. I am not TINI, I don't agree with them and never have. How you came to that conclusion is indeed puzzling.

Of course he has a right to change and chances are he did change. If he had a drug dependency in the past doesn't mean that he still has a drug problem. I never said that. I'm saying that past drug usage does create a physiological tolerance to other drugs and this could have been why he chose Propofol. Again, this is not saying that this was all Michael's fault. I do agree that Murray was incompetent and deserves all the blame.
Click to expand...


of course I'm funny. You don't have to state it; "keep it in the closet"
 
Ramona122003 said:
I have already said why this is unlikely in any event. I heavily doubt second degree murder is even on their minds.

Also, there is no way you can paint Murray as a butcher, no matter how much you do like him. Most likely, he will plea-bargain and get a lesser change since any defense makes him look bad.
Click to expand...

no Ramona , the time of death left the DA with no choice but to build a case based on second degree murder . Murray performed a dangerous action by giving propofol with no medical equipment to help revive his patient if anything went wrong and showed no regard to human life when he was on phone calling people while his patient was not monitored( ofcourse that if you believe his story , I don't) . this is second degree murder not simple manslaughter .
 
Sirena said:
If the prosecution paints Murray as a "glorified drug dealer" - then the defense will plea bargain that Murray did get propofol to MJ and accept a lesser degree manslaughter charge. Murray gets the slap on the wrist, pays a fine, maybe does some jail at a Club-Fed type prison for the drug charges and walks out of jail in less than 2 years.

If the prosecution paints Murray as a butcher who grossly neglected his patient and his oath as a doctor, while pumping him with massive amounts of propofol and killed his patient, then Murray can be charged with a heavier indictment (which is what I'd like to see happen.)
Click to expand...


i agree. Murray will probably serve only 2 years and then spend the rest of his time at Acupulco enjoying himself.
 
Last edited:
Sirena said:
Oh I don't like Murray at all, whatever gave you that idea?

Only the LA County DA will know whether to paint Murray as the "glorified drug dealer" or the "butcher." And the DA is the one who makes the decision of offering a plea deal - the defense can offer it, but ultimately the DA will decide.

And I really hope that the DA won't enter a plea deal with Murray, unless there is compelling evidence that can tie another person as a co-conspirator that forced Murray to act the way he did.
Click to expand...


Everyone is offer a plea-bargain for confession to a crime before they go to court. That is how most serial killer avoid the death penalty. Even Michael was offer a plea-bargain, but the details are only release if they take it.

There are taking there time to have an airtight case so they can get Murray to confess and they can be done with it. Having trails are expensive and most DAs try to avoid one, unless it is to glorified themselves.
 
Ramona122003 said:
If you read the all the posts here, you will already know why that is unlikely.

He is a doctor. Even if Michael got on his knees and beg for the damn drug, he had a responsibility to say no. He should had either walk away or got him help. Or at least someone who was actually trained to give him the drug. If they paint Michael as an addict, Murray would just be a glorified drug dealing who cared more about his paycheck then the life of his patient. No jury would have support someone like that.

Kevorkian had a more valid excuse than Murray and still served 8 years in prison. Also, OJ was a bad case because the physical evident was mess up, so that is a poor example. This case has enough physical evident to hang Murray and even if it didn't, look at the paragraph above.
Click to expand...


Why should Murray worry/ feel guilt if he is deemed a "glorified drug dealer" as long as he gets his freedom. The man showed no remorse for killings his patient; therefore why should he care about being labelled?
 
Soundmind said:
no Ramona , the time of death left the DA with no choice but to build a case based on second degree murder . Murray performed a dangerous action by giving propofol with no medical equipment to help revive his patient if anything went wrong and showed no regard to human life when he was on phone calling people while his patient was not monitored( ofcourse that if you believe his story , I don't) . this is second degree murder not simple manslaughter .
Click to expand...



It is actually criminally negligent manslaughter, not just manslaughter. Unless they can prove malice or intent, they will have a heck of a time proven second degree murder. Pumping him full of drugs cannot be proven as intent. The DA would be fools to go for a big what if charge and lost the case then go for a sure thing.

Look at my other post to learn more about criminally negligent manslaughter.
 
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.
 
Pascal09 said:
of course I'm funny. You don't have to state it; "keep it in the closet"
Click to expand...

Pascal, quit badgering Renee with wrongful questioning of her motives. Whether you agree with her or not, she obviously does not have a TINI agenda... .. just look at her quote upthread where she OBJECTS to TINI and says she considers them helpful to Murray:

ReneeM said:
The TRINI group was also giving Murray his defense. A past history of drug abuse is not what killed him. Murray's lawyers can make that claim in court but any competent prosecutor can shoot that down.
Click to expand...

I really dislike the "debating" tactic of unfairly questioning motives.
 
Pascal09 said:
Why should Murray worry/ feel guilt if he is deemed a "glorified drug dealer" as long as he gets his freedom. The man show no remorse for killings his patient; therefore why should he care about being labelled?
Click to expand...



The point being he will not get off for being a glorified drug dealer. This will show him as being a self serving man who cared more about being paid than the life of his patient. And he has the nerve to call himself a doctor.

Tell me, what jury do you know would let a man like this off. Especially if he can practice on someone else. Read my whole post next time please, because I clearly explain this.
 
Ramona122003 said:
Everyone is offer a plea-bargain for confession to a crime before they go to court. That is how most serial killer avoid the death penalty. Even Michael was offer a plea-bargain, but the details are only release if they take it.

There are taking there time to have an airtight case so they can get Murray to confess and they can be done with it. Having trails are expensive and most DAs try to avoid one, unless it is to glorified themselves.
Click to expand...

Agree with your statement, but I think the DA does want to take this to trial, because of what you said "glorify themselves" - also I'd add to that "cleaning up LA County's image in prosecuting celebrity cases."

Yes, airtight case building. Agree. Since the LAPD is taking so much time to investigate, it could be seen as a means to force a plea deal. The lead detective, Orlando Martinez, requested that all documents be sealed until mid-January 2010.

But then again, playing devil's advocate here, it could also mean that the DA won't entertain a plea deal and wants to make sure that the case is so tight, that they could throw multiple charges at Murray and they all stick.

Remember, Murray has the DEA on him as well. The LA County DA is probably working parallel with them on this, which explains the delay.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top