CA - Dr. Conrad Murray charged in the death of Michael Jackson

[panthera]

My heart has been so heavy today. I have read all of the autopsy report. Michael only had in his system what Murray said he gave him. All the other drugs found in the closet in Murray's room were not in MJs system. He didn't have the ample equipment. Most of the few items found were still in the closet.

It broke my heart to read it verified that MJ did indeed have Vitiligo. All those years he tried to tell everyone and they accused him of wanting to be white. How sad and heartbreaking.

I think the DA is gun shy because they have lost so many high profile cases and that is why they went with something that they know they can prove.

The seeing of other doctors in the past is totally irrelevant now since he was taking just what Murray gave him. With no other drugs found in his system that now becomes a moot point in the homicide investigation.

The defense did not get the autopsy report until today either. I am sure they were shocked thinking MJ would have many other drugs in his system but they were wrong. Everyone around MJ for months before his death said he was not abusing drugs and was eating healthy.

The autopsy shows that he was a relatively healthy 50 year old man. All of his organs were healthy.

I hope Michael is at peace now where he will never again have to prove the truth he always knew. He is free from this mean cruel world that persecuted him for so long imo.

http://tmz.vo.llnwd.net/o28/newsdesk/tmz_documents/0208_mj_case_report_wm.pdf

I haven't had a chance to read the autopsy report yet...going to do so now. I have been listening to the discussion on NG's show and heard about the Vitiligo. It is sad that so many didn't understand what Michael had to endure all his life. And it is more comforting now knowing the only drugs present in his system were those given by Dr. Murray. With that it should be much easier for a jury to convict him. MOO

 

[Isabelle]

It is involuntary manslaughter because doctors do have broad disretionary power as to how to use meds. he is a doctor and was allowed to do what he did even though it was poor judgement and rarely used in that way. Still and all the patient basically died due to the treatment and that is involuntary manslaughter. i think the DA had to be extremely careful about overcharging because in CA that is never a good way to go. I think it was a good move and will probably win because of it. Anything stronger would have a greater risk of backfiring. jmho

JB

As an RN, I would believe that when medical experts testify as to the docs heinous acts, the jury and prosecutors will realize they have made an error in choosing an involuntary manslaughter charge. The doc acted so far outside the standards of care for a patient under the effects of general anesthesia, that it is akin to murder with intent. The intent would stem from the knowledge that the doc should have possessed, regarding a drug as dangerous as propofol, by virtue of his MD license. He would have known what the risks were and what actions should be taken/equipment needed in the event of an arrest, but he did not prepare for this - an arrogant action on his part. In the OR, vital signs are taken every 5 minutes or more often it there is a negative trending, I doubt the doc took vitals once, since there has been no mention of any record keeping. What he did is absolutely criminal and was done with no respect for human life. Just horrible. It is at times like this that I am embarrassed to be a member of the medical community.

Isabelle, a patient advocate.

 

[Isabelle]

It is involuntary manslaughter because doctors do have broad disretionary power as to how to use meds. he is a doctor and was allowed to do what he did even though it was poor judgement and rarely used in that way. Still and all the patient basically died due to the treatment and that is involuntary manslaughter. i think the DA had to be extremely careful about overcharging because in CA that is never a good way to go. I think it was a good move and will probably win because of it. Anything stronger would have a greater risk of backfiring. jmho

JB

As an RN, I would believe that when medical experts testify as to the docs heinous acts, the jury and prosecutors will realize they have made an error in choosing an involuntary manslaughter charge. The doc acted so far outside the standards of care for a patient under the effects of general anesthesia, that it is akin to murder with intent. The intent would stem from the knowledge that the doc should have possessed, regarding a drug as dangerous as propofol, by virtue of his MD license. He would have known what the risks were and what actions should be taken/equipment needed in the event of an arrest, but he did not prepare for this - an arrogant action on his part. In the OR, vital signs are taken every 5 minutes or more often it there is a negative trending, I doubt the doc took vitals once, since there has been no mention of any record keeping. What he did is absolutely criminal and was done with no respect for human life. Just horrible. It is at times like this that I am embarrassed to be a member of the medical community.

Isabelle, a patient advocate.

 

[JBean]

Thanks so much for the explanation. I had forgotten that this is LA County and you're right, I can see the DA having to be careful not to overcharge as they don't want an acquittal. On Nancy's show they've also discussed him losing his license to practice medicine. Would that be true in all three states, or just California? :waitasec:

The medical board would probably be the body to revoke his license and I believe that is happening or has happened and I think thst is on a state by state basis. As for the court, the judge forbade him from sedating anyone in any state under any circumstances for any reason. The judge said he doesn't care if he practices and he can use local anesthetic, but if it requires sedation he must have a partner in his practice administer it or an anesthesiologist. the judge looked right at him and said;
"don't sedate anyone!"

 

[JBean]

Thanks so much for the explanation. I had forgotten that this is LA County and you're right, I can see the DA having to be careful not to overcharge as they don't want an acquittal. On Nancy's show they've also discussed him losing his license to practice medicine. Would that be true in all three states, or just California? :waitasec:

The medical board would probably be the body to revoke his license and I believe that is happening or has happened and I think thst is on a state by state basis. As for the court, the judge forbade him from sedating anyone in any state under any circumstances for any reason. The judge said he doesn't care if he practices and he can use local anesthetic, but if it requires sedation he must have a partner in his practice administer it or an anesthesiologist. the judge looked right at him and said;
"don't sedate anyone!"

 

[JBean]

JB

As an RN, I would believe that when medical experts testify as to the docs heinous acts, the jury and prosecutors will realize they have made an error in choosing an involuntary manslaughter charge. The doc acted so far outside the standards of care for a patient under the effects of general anesthesia, that it is akin to murder with intent. The intent would stem from the knowledge that the doc should have possessed, regarding a drug as dangerous as propofol, by virtue of his MD license. He would have known what the risks were and what actions should be taken/equipment needed in the event of an arrest, but he did not prepare for this - an arrogant action on his part. In the OR, vital signs are taken every 5 minutes or more often it there is a negative trending, I doubt the doc took vitals once, since there has been no mention of any record keeping. What he did is absolutely criminal and was done with no respect for human life. Just horrible. It is at times like this that I am embarrassed to be a member of the medical community.

Isabelle, a patient advocate.

I don't disgaree with your premise at all. But he does have the ability to use propofol and the DA knows it. By virtue of the fact that he has the prescribing ability and power to use it in treatment goes a long way as far as the law goes. I am only speaking about CA and here, showing that he intentionally killed him would be difficult because he does have this power. but, he was negligent and that , and what you said, all go to involuntary manslaughter and the DA wants a charge he can prove for a guaranteed conviction. Here in CA it may even be hard to prove involuntary manslaughter to the satisfaction of the jury. I believe if they charged him with anything higher there would be an acquittal. JHMO of course.

Remeber, often in these situations it is just a civil case. the fact that they are charging the doctor criminally at all is a pretty big deal. So, imo overcharging would be a big mistake.

 

[JBean]

JB

As an RN, I would believe that when medical experts testify as to the docs heinous acts, the jury and prosecutors will realize they have made an error in choosing an involuntary manslaughter charge. The doc acted so far outside the standards of care for a patient under the effects of general anesthesia, that it is akin to murder with intent. The intent would stem from the knowledge that the doc should have possessed, regarding a drug as dangerous as propofol, by virtue of his MD license. He would have known what the risks were and what actions should be taken/equipment needed in the event of an arrest, but he did not prepare for this - an arrogant action on his part. In the OR, vital signs are taken every 5 minutes or more often it there is a negative trending, I doubt the doc took vitals once, since there has been no mention of any record keeping. What he did is absolutely criminal and was done with no respect for human life. Just horrible. It is at times like this that I am embarrassed to be a member of the medical community.

Isabelle, a patient advocate.

I don't disgaree with your premise at all. But he does have the ability to use propofol and the DA knows it. By virtue of the fact that he has the prescribing ability and power to use it in treatment goes a long way as far as the law goes. I am only speaking about CA and here, showing that he intentionally killed him would be difficult because he does have this power. but, he was negligent and that , and what you said, all go to involuntary manslaughter and the DA wants a charge he can prove for a guaranteed conviction. Here in CA it may even be hard to prove involuntary manslaughter to the satisfaction of the jury. I believe if they charged him with anything higher there would be an acquittal. JHMO of course.

Remeber, often in these situations it is just a civil case. the fact that they are charging the doctor criminally at all is a pretty big deal. So, imo overcharging would be a big mistake.

 

[JBean]

Here is an article that says it pretty well ,imo

The key to proving involuntary manslaughter will be convincing jurors that Murray was negligent in the extreme, she said. "Ordinarily, criminal law doesn't pursue negligence. But because the harm is so great, the negligence is considered criminal."
Jurors don't have to get inside Murray's head to determine what he knew about the dangers of propofol, she said. It's what he should have known that makes the difference.
"Involuntary manslaughter is for clueless defendants," Levenson said. "It's the ultimate should-have-known-better charge. And the way you prove that is to put on a bunch of experts and independent witnesses to say he should have known better."

http://www.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/02/08/jackson.murray.involuntary.manslaughter/

 

[JBean]

Here is an article that says it pretty well ,imo

The key to proving involuntary manslaughter will be convincing jurors that Murray was negligent in the extreme, she said. "Ordinarily, criminal law doesn't pursue negligence. But because the harm is so great, the negligence is considered criminal."
Jurors don't have to get inside Murray's head to determine what he knew about the dangers of propofol, she said. It's what he should have known that makes the difference.
"Involuntary manslaughter is for clueless defendants," Levenson said. "It's the ultimate should-have-known-better charge. And the way you prove that is to put on a bunch of experts and independent witnesses to say he should have known better."

http://www.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/02/08/jackson.murray.involuntary.manslaughter/

 

[Isabelle]

Having just read the autopsy report, I am sickened. I am wondering if the DA read pages 21 and 31 of the report, the information is presented in simple enough form that a 3rd or 4th grader could understand how wrong the doc's actions were. Further to learn that Michael's stomach contained 0.13 mg of propofol is really amazing. For this to happen, there had to be a fluid shift from the vascular system to the non-vascular system, something often seen with major trauma and vascular collapse/asystole (flatline).

The consulting anesthesiologist comments on the doc's actions being outside standards of care and that the amount of propofol given is the same that would be given for major abdominal surgery. Further, the fact that a bp cuff, pulse ox (in the closet), oxygen and non-rebreather bag were in the home strengthens the fact that the doc knew how dangerous his actions were and knew what the potential for cardiorespiratory arrest were. This is arrogance to the max and an absolute and complete disregard for human life. To have this knowledge and commit the act that this doctor committed is just a horrible, horrible thing. I hope I never find myself in California needing medical care, considering their judicial system has little to no common sense or compassion for those at the mercy of negligent physicians.

Isabelle, a patient advocate

P.s. I forgot to mention that the bag containing IV fluid did NOT contain propofol. The propofol was found in the tubing near the "y" connector where the propofol would have been injected. So, the doc was so adventurous and fearless, he bolused Michael with this deadly drug - unfreaking believable. Does the DA and his guys know how to read, or do they really understand what is said in the autopsy report - I think not!

 

[Isabelle]

Having just read the autopsy report, I am sickened. I am wondering if the DA read pages 21 and 31 of the report, the information is presented in simple enough form that a 3rd or 4th grader could understand how wrong the doc's actions were. Further to learn that Michael's stomach contained 0.13 mg of propofol is really amazing. For this to happen, there had to be a fluid shift from the vascular system to the non-vascular system, something often seen with major trauma and vascular collapse/asystole (flatline).

The consulting anesthesiologist comments on the doc's actions being outside standards of care and that the amount of propofol given is the same that would be given for major abdominal surgery. Further, the fact that a bp cuff, pulse ox (in the closet), oxygen and non-rebreather bag were in the home strengthens the fact that the doc knew how dangerous his actions were and knew what the potential for cardiorespiratory arrest were. This is arrogance to the max and an absolute and complete disregard for human life. To have this knowledge and commit the act that this doctor committed is just a horrible, horrible thing. I hope I never find myself in California needing medical care, considering their judicial system has little to no common sense or compassion for those at the mercy of negligent physicians.

Isabelle, a patient advocate

P.s. I forgot to mention that the bag containing IV fluid did NOT contain propofol. The propofol was found in the tubing near the "y" connector where the propofol would have been injected. So, the doc was so adventurous and fearless, he bolused Michael with this deadly drug - unfreaking believable. Does the DA and his guys know how to read, or do they really understand what is said in the autopsy report - I think not!

 

[SuziQ]

Med Board Goes After Murray with a Vengeance

Read more: http://www.tmz.com/#ixzz0f0RGSvqw

PDF Doc:
http://tmz.vo.llnwd.net/o28/newsdesk/tmz_documents/0208_medical_docs.pdf

 

[SuziQ]

Med Board Goes After Murray with a Vengeance

Read more: http://www.tmz.com/#ixzz0f0RGSvqw

PDF Doc:
http://tmz.vo.llnwd.net/o28/newsdesk/tmz_documents/0208_medical_docs.pdf

 

[Isabelle]

Here is an article that says it pretty well ,imo

The key to proving involuntary manslaughter will be convincing jurors that Murray was negligent in the extreme, she said. "Ordinarily, criminal law doesn't pursue negligence. But because the harm is so great, the negligence is considered criminal."
Jurors don't have to get inside Murray's head to determine what he knew about the dangers of propofol, she said. It's what he should have known that makes the difference.
"Involuntary manslaughter is for clueless defendants," Levenson said. "It's the ultimate should-have-known-better charge. And the way you prove that is to put on a bunch of experts and independent witnesses to say he should have known better."

http://www.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/02/08/jackson.murray.involuntary.manslaughter/

As I commented on earlier, I hope I am never in need of medical care in California.

p.s. JB, I'm not trying to badger you and I know that you are not disagreeing with me. The nurse side of me is so crazed over this issue that it is very hard to contain my feelings on this issue. If only the public really knew what goes on in the medical industry - it is quite frightening.

 

[Isabelle]

Here is an article that says it pretty well ,imo

The key to proving involuntary manslaughter will be convincing jurors that Murray was negligent in the extreme, she said. "Ordinarily, criminal law doesn't pursue negligence. But because the harm is so great, the negligence is considered criminal."
Jurors don't have to get inside Murray's head to determine what he knew about the dangers of propofol, she said. It's what he should have known that makes the difference.
"Involuntary manslaughter is for clueless defendants," Levenson said. "It's the ultimate should-have-known-better charge. And the way you prove that is to put on a bunch of experts and independent witnesses to say he should have known better."

http://www.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/02/08/jackson.murray.involuntary.manslaughter/

As I commented on earlier, I hope I am never in need of medical care in California.

p.s. JB, I'm not trying to badger you and I know that you are not disagreeing with me. The nurse side of me is so crazed over this issue that it is very hard to contain my feelings on this issue. If only the public really knew what goes on in the medical industry - it is quite frightening.

 

[JBean]

As I commented on earlier, I hope I am never in need of medical care in California.

p.s. JB, I'm not trying to badger you and I know that you are not disagreeing with me. The nurse side of me is so crazed over this issue that it is very hard to contain my feelings on this issue. If only the public really knew what goes on in the medical industry - it is quite frightening.

i didn't take anything negative towards me in what you were posting at all.
My father was a plastic surgeon and so I do have some understanding.

As an aside, I have gotten some of the most excellent medical care here in CA and I have no personal complaints. I had propofol recently for a procedure and had an in depth conversation with the anesthesiologist about Murray and this situation. He was very knowledgeable and basically confirms what we have all come to understand about proper administration of this drug. I don't think Murray represents the norm.

ETA: Isabelle, if you would like to post as a nurse, you may want to get verified by Tricia so we can list you as a professional and it will give your posts more weight and they will be even more educational. Thanks for your input.

 

[JBean]

As I commented on earlier, I hope I am never in need of medical care in California.

p.s. JB, I'm not trying to badger you and I know that you are not disagreeing with me. The nurse side of me is so crazed over this issue that it is very hard to contain my feelings on this issue. If only the public really knew what goes on in the medical industry - it is quite frightening.

i didn't take anything negative towards me in what you were posting at all.
My father was a plastic surgeon and so I do have some understanding.

As an aside, I have gotten some of the most excellent medical care here in CA and I have no personal complaints. I had propofol recently for a procedure and had an in depth conversation with the anesthesiologist about Murray and this situation. He was very knowledgeable and basically confirms what we have all come to understand about proper administration of this drug. I don't think Murray represents the norm.

ETA: Isabelle, if you would like to post as a nurse, you may want to get verified by Tricia so we can list you as a professional and it will give your posts more weight and they will be even more educational. Thanks for your input.

 

[Isabelle]

i didn't take anything negative towards me in what you were posting at all.
My father was a plastic surgeon and so I do have some understanding.

As an aside, I have gotten some of the most excellent medical care here in CA and I have no personal complaints. I had propofol recently for a procedure and had an in depth conversation with the anesthesiologist about Murray and this situation. He was very knowledgeable and basically confirms what we have all come to understand about proper administration of this drug. I don't think Murray represents the norm.

ETA: Isabelle, if you would like to post as a nurse, you may want to get verified by Tricia so we can list you as a professional and it will give your posts more weight and they will be even more educational. Thanks for your input.

Thanks. How would I contact Tricia to get verified? You are very welcome.

 

[Isabelle]

i didn't take anything negative towards me in what you were posting at all.
My father was a plastic surgeon and so I do have some understanding.

As an aside, I have gotten some of the most excellent medical care here in CA and I have no personal complaints. I had propofol recently for a procedure and had an in depth conversation with the anesthesiologist about Murray and this situation. He was very knowledgeable and basically confirms what we have all come to understand about proper administration of this drug. I don't think Murray represents the norm.

ETA: Isabelle, if you would like to post as a nurse, you may want to get verified by Tricia so we can list you as a professional and it will give your posts more weight and they will be even more educational. Thanks for your input.

Thanks. How would I contact Tricia to get verified? You are very welcome.

 

[JBean]

Thanks. How would I contact Tricia to get verified? You are very welcome.

I would love to add you to our list.
you can pm her here username is tricia
or
tgrif@xmission.com