Not sure about anywhere else but here we've been getting a blow by blow on the Conrad Murray/Michael Jackson trial. Am truly hoping this will end soon. Going to be really interesting what the jury decides.
I guess the issue for me is 1) How money can change your ethical values (Dr. Murray was paid $150,000/month to administer the drug propofol which he obviously did in a non-hospital setting
and
2) Why the news media thinks we're all so interested and how far the Media will intrude into a public figures life. Seems sometimes that nothing personal is ever off limits.
Trial of MJ
Moderators: DJKeefy, 4u Network
- LovelyLadyLux
- Egypt4u God
- Posts: 11596
- Joined: Sun Nov 29, 2009 9:12 pm
- Location: Canada
- Has thanked: 417 times
- Been thanked: 2714 times
- Horus
- Egypt4u God
- Posts: 12363
- Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2008 2:15 am
- Location: UK
- Has thanked: 1658 times
- Been thanked: 2213 times
- Gender:
Actually LLL, both myself and Mrs H have been avidly following this case live on SKY TV coverage and I have to say we have been thoroughly engrossed in it.
It has been an eye opener into the American legal system and so far I have been very impressed with the way your system works. It may be a media circus outside, but in the courtroom it has all been conducted extremely well.
The judge Michael Pastor is an excellent choice and is not playing up to the cameras in any way, he keeps a very tight reign on the courtroom, but has a great manner in the way he treats the jurors and the witnesses. On a more personal basis I think that the persecution have put up a far better case than the defence who at times appeared shambolic. Deputy District Attorney David Walgren is like a dog with a rabbit and puts his case in a very measured and methodical manner, I would not want him to be the prosecutor in a case against myself. Alternatively the defence led mainly by attorney Ed Chernoff looked a bit chaotic at times.
Most of the real evidence rests on whether or not you believe the testimony of Dr White who is an expert on the drug Propophol or Dr Shaffer who is an expert on how drugs such as Propophol react within the body. Both gave very detailed accounts and are both very knowledgeable, but on balance I would say that Shaffer’s knowledge is more up to date and more unbiased that Dr Whites who is after all a paid consultant for the defence.
The bottom line is as far as I can see it, that Dr Murray is guilty of negligence in so much as he administered a drug in surroundings that were totally unsuitable and to me that was his main mistake. However I can see that due to his financial problems (not reported in the US trial) he was desperate to make money and so took the lucrative position as Jackson’s private doctor. On Jackson’s part it is fairly obvious that he was in effect employing his own private drug pusher, for that is the only name you can give to someone who administers prescription drugs to you on a nightly basis in order to sedate you. For that reason I also blame Michael Jackson for contributing to his own death by employing Dr Murray to carry out this type of sedation which by every witness account should only be done in a fully equipped hospital setting.
So is Dr Murray guilty? Well if you had listened to all the evidence, yes he clearly is, but only of negligence in not supervising Jackson more carefully. But this is in America and if a jury can find OJ Simpson not guilty, then anything is possible.
It has been an eye opener into the American legal system and so far I have been very impressed with the way your system works. It may be a media circus outside, but in the courtroom it has all been conducted extremely well.
The judge Michael Pastor is an excellent choice and is not playing up to the cameras in any way, he keeps a very tight reign on the courtroom, but has a great manner in the way he treats the jurors and the witnesses. On a more personal basis I think that the persecution have put up a far better case than the defence who at times appeared shambolic. Deputy District Attorney David Walgren is like a dog with a rabbit and puts his case in a very measured and methodical manner, I would not want him to be the prosecutor in a case against myself. Alternatively the defence led mainly by attorney Ed Chernoff looked a bit chaotic at times.
Most of the real evidence rests on whether or not you believe the testimony of Dr White who is an expert on the drug Propophol or Dr Shaffer who is an expert on how drugs such as Propophol react within the body. Both gave very detailed accounts and are both very knowledgeable, but on balance I would say that Shaffer’s knowledge is more up to date and more unbiased that Dr Whites who is after all a paid consultant for the defence.
The bottom line is as far as I can see it, that Dr Murray is guilty of negligence in so much as he administered a drug in surroundings that were totally unsuitable and to me that was his main mistake. However I can see that due to his financial problems (not reported in the US trial) he was desperate to make money and so took the lucrative position as Jackson’s private doctor. On Jackson’s part it is fairly obvious that he was in effect employing his own private drug pusher, for that is the only name you can give to someone who administers prescription drugs to you on a nightly basis in order to sedate you. For that reason I also blame Michael Jackson for contributing to his own death by employing Dr Murray to carry out this type of sedation which by every witness account should only be done in a fully equipped hospital setting.
So is Dr Murray guilty? Well if you had listened to all the evidence, yes he clearly is, but only of negligence in not supervising Jackson more carefully. But this is in America and if a jury can find OJ Simpson not guilty, then anything is possible.
- LovelyLadyLux
- Egypt4u God
- Posts: 11596
- Joined: Sun Nov 29, 2009 9:12 pm
- Location: Canada
- Has thanked: 417 times
- Been thanked: 2714 times
To me, Dr. M is very guilty of negligence. He gave away this ethics for $ in administering propofol to MJ. I find it amazing how one can spend years of study in a profession, ascribe to a Code of Ethics and then abandon same for money.
I have only seen the 'highlights' of the trial on CNN and haven't followed it closely at all.
IMO MJ was a rich druggie who highered his own pusher who, in the end, failed him by not supervising him in a very dangerous medical setting that should never have happened outside a hospital........but......money can buy one many things. Even ones own demise.
I would only wish that if I ever asked a doctor for a procedure or medication that wasn't in my own best interest the doctor would say 'no' and mean it.
I have only seen the 'highlights' of the trial on CNN and haven't followed it closely at all.
IMO MJ was a rich druggie who highered his own pusher who, in the end, failed him by not supervising him in a very dangerous medical setting that should never have happened outside a hospital........but......money can buy one many things. Even ones own demise.
I would only wish that if I ever asked a doctor for a procedure or medication that wasn't in my own best interest the doctor would say 'no' and mean it.
-
- Similar Topics
- Replies
- Views
- Last post
-
- 9 Replies
- 2429 Views
-
Last post by LovelyLadyLux
-
- 6 Replies
- 2085 Views
-
Last post by LovelyLadyLux
-
- 0 Replies
- 921 Views
-
Last post by DJKeefy
-
- 0 Replies
- 1052 Views
-
Last post by Horus
-
- 8 Replies
- 2475 Views
-
Last post by LovelyLadyLux