The latest news on Michael Jackson

[HVC]

He still isn't burried, is he? Even in death the guys a freak show.

[DontSayBanana]

2: Jacko took the sedatives and doc didn't know about it. The propofol plus those did him in. (pretty likely, IMO)

Timing and tox levels would be everything in that defense- regardless of superstar status, I'm pretty sure Jacko's doctor was bound to do routine bloodwork to avoid just such an occurrence.

[jimmy olsen]

Doc looks screwed to me.

http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/thehumancondition/archive/2009/08/24/michael-jackson-s-medical-homicide-what-the-coroner-s-announcement-really-means.aspx

Full Post
Posted Monday, August 24, 2009 7:14 PM
Michael Jackson's Medical Homicide: What The Coroner's Announcement Really Means
Newsweek

Michael Jackson's death took a bizarre turn this afternoon when the Los Angeles County Coroner's office announced it'd found the anesthetic propofol, usually used in general surgery, and two other sedatives to have caused the singer's death in June. The drugs were no surprise—court testimony earlier this week established early on that Jackson was on myriad medications the day he died. The big shock came when the coroner announced that the death was being labeled a homicide.

It's important to note that homicide indicates that Jackson was killed; it does not, necessarily, mean he was murdered (homicide with intent to kill); many previous medical homicide cases have involved euthanasia. The Los Angeles County DA has not yet announced murder or manslaughter charges against Jackson's physician,Conrad Murray, who admits to giving Jackson the drugs.

Besides the fact that it made Jackson family whisperings of a conspiracy sound slightly less crazy, the homicide announcement left us wondering: what does medical homicide even mean? How do you draw the line between medical homicide and malpractice? And is as bad as it sounds?
Advertisement
Click here to find out more!

Yes, actually. NEWSWEEK's Sarah Kliff spoke with Dr. Vincent DiMaio, editor of the American Journal of Forensic Medicine and Pathology and former chief medical examiner in Baxter County, Texas about what constitutes medical homicide, what doesn't and why it's actually not too difficult to tell the difference. Excerpts:


By classifying this death as a homicide, what is the Los Angeles County Coroner's Office saying about the actions of Jackson's doctor?
What they're alleging is that [Michael Jackson's doctor] gave [Jackson] a medication for a non-medical reason and that caused the death...The reason they can classify this as a homicide is that there is simply no medical reason for this drug to have been administered. Suppose he was in surgery, and the doctor had given him too much medication. That's a different situation which would probably be signed off on as an accident. But in this situation, it's clearly a homicide.

In general, how do you define a medical homicide? What makes it different from medical malpractice?
There are five ways that forensic pathologists categorize deaths: natural, accidental, homicide, suicide or undetermined. Essentially, homicide means that somebody has caused the death of another person...In terms of medical homicide specifically, I think the simplest way to say it is that it's a medical decision that's outrageous, that you could not justify your actions medically. Or you just go to extremes, like deciding to do an operative procedure for which you don't have the support, doing an operation on your kitchen table. That's essentially the way to say it: if you have a medical situation, where you're using things inappropriately and have no medical justification, that's homicide.

Is it difficult, in medical situations, to draw a line between accident and homicide? Are there cases that fall in between?
Usually, it's actually really simple. If the doctor makes a mistake, you have records and other people who were in the room, and it would mostly be classified as malpractice. If it's reasonable, and you screw up, it's not going to be homicide. When you do something that's really out there, that makes absolutely no medical sense at all, something like this, that's when it's no longer malpractice.

What about the Jackson case clearly indicates it was a homicide?
Even though there was no intention to kill, what he did was so beyond what normal people would consider reasonable medicine that it gets classified as a homicide. There was no medical justification and, besides that, he was using an anesthetic without an anesthesiologist. So not only do you have no medical justification, you also don't have the right support system in place.

Will it be possible for the doctor to argue his case as a medical mistake, a case of negligence, not homicide?
You just can't argue this one. Here's the problem question for him: what is the medical justification for giving him this drug? And that's where they've got him, because there is no medical reason for the situation he was in. He wasn't even doing an operative procedure and there was no anesthesiologist. Moreover, he's an internist. Even if the drug were warranted, the conditions would be inappropriate. It's not his specialty, its not internal medicine and there were no support personnel.

How often do medical homicide cases come up in forensic pathology?
Very rarely. You do get some situations where doctors do medical procedures that are not recognized, causing the death of a patient, but most of these are medical malpractice. Most of the homicide cases that I know of are euthanasia, which is a bit different. It just gets to the point that, for something to be categorized as homicide, it would have to be something really gross, where there's no real justification for what they are doing.

How does the Jackson case fit into the history of forensic pathology?
It's completely unusual, not something that anyone, myself included, would ever expect to encounter. The only cases called homicide, that I know of, were where it was intended [the euthanasia cases]. But there's nothing to this level.

[Ancient Demon]

I wonder what the doctor was thinking when he did that.

[Liep]

So a new single is released, This Is It. Bad still should've been that.

[jimmy olsen]

Doc to be charged on Monday.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-jackson-death6-2010feb06,0,319714.story

D.A. to charge doctor in Michael Jackson case
Prosecutor will file charges against Dr. Conrad Murray on Monday, officials say. The action comes after negotiations on his surrender bogged down, sources say.


By Harriet Ryan, Jack Leonard and Richard Winton

February 6, 2010

The Los Angeles County district attorney's office will file a criminal case against Dr. Conrad Murray on Monday, authorities said, capping an eight-month police investigation into Michael Jackson's death and ending days of intense speculation about when the singer's personal physician would be charged.

Official confirmation of an impending criminal prosecution in the Jackson matter came Friday in a press release in which the district attorney's office took the unusual step of announcing charges in advance. The move seemed designed to temporarily quell a media frenzy that had drawn a hundred reporters and a fleet of television trucks to a courthouse near LAX on Friday morning in anticipation of imminent charges.

The statement from prosecutors said a case pertaining to Jackson's death will be filed at that courthouse, but did not name Murray or specify the charges. Numerous sources with knowledge of the case said the cardiologist will be charged with involuntary manslaughter for administering the combination of sedatives and anesthetic blamed in the singer's June death.

Prosecutors originally planned to file the case Friday, according to law enforcement sources, who said the case was delayed after a dispute arose with Murray's defense team Thursday over the details of his surrender.

Murray, who owns a home in Nevada and works in Houston, has been staying in the Los Angeles area as he awaits charges. Through his attorney, the doctor has said he wants to turn himself in rather than be arrested and has made arrangements for surrender, including gathering his passport and meeting with bail bond companies.

But how bail should be set became a sticking point during negotiations between prosecutors and the defense, according to two law enforcement sources and Murray's lawyer, Ed Chernoff.

Prosecutors wanted Murray to make a formal court appearance in which a judge would evaluate the specific circumstances of the case, set the amount of bail and dictate any restrictions on his movements, according to law enforcement sources who requested anonymity because of the sensitivity of the case.

Murray's lawyer said negotiations broke down because authorities insisted on "a photo op" of the physician in handcuffs.

Chernoff said Murray wanted to turn himself in at a police station and post the $25,000 bail that is the court-set standard for involuntary manslaughter charges. The bond would allow him to walk out of the police station and remain free pending a formal arraignment, Chernoff said.

He said prosecutors asked Murray to agree not to post bail at the police station so he could be taken into custody, transported to a courthouse by police and brought before a judge, the lawyer said.

"I told them there is no way that I'm going to let my client sit in jail so you can have your show and parade him into court in handcuffs," Chernoff said. "That's when they pulled the plug."

A district attorney's spokeswoman disputed Chernoff's account, saying prosecutors were never interested in "a photo op" involving Murray.

"That's an absolute lie," said spokeswoman Sandi Gibbons. "There was never any consideration of a 'perp walk' or him being brought into a courtroom in handcuffs."

Gibbons said discussions about a defendant's terms of surrender are common.

It's unclear whether the issue was resolved. In a statement, the district attorney's office said information about the arraignment would be released after Murray is charged. Involuntary manslaughter, which refers to an unlawful killing committed without malice, intent to kill or a conscious disregard for human life, carries a maximum sentence of four years in prison.

Murray acknowledged to police that he gave Jackson an intravenous dose of the powerful anesthetic propofol shortly before his death, according to court documents.

The drug is intended for use in operating rooms by trained anesthesiologists. Murray told police that the singer had a long history of using the drug to sleep and he was trying to wean Jackson from it the week he died, the documents state.

[Martinus]

I feel kinda sorry for the guy. I hate how many sources are portraying that as a greedy doc killing a man of pure innocence. Instead, we have a creepy multimillionaire freak bribing a doc to drug him up because his nose fell off.

Seriously, I never got Jackson's phenomenon. He had some good songs, yeah, but they were not a different league than at least a dozen of other contemporary artists. And unlike those other artists, he was a disgusting creep.

[Jaron]

I think the thing with Michael Jackson is he showed extraordinary talent from a very young age. As an adult, his fame and popularity were without peer in the 1980s. It wasn't until the child molestation charges came out and the weird 90s and 2000s that people started to take a step back from him.

The man was a legend during his life, no one else has reached the level he reached since.

Oh right, except Kylie and Madonna, right?

[Martinus]

I'll take Freddie Mercury in terms of voice/music talent and Madonna in terms of showbiz talent over Michael any time of the day. His music was kinda sucky. His voice was whiny.

[jimmy olsen]

You're fucking crazy, Micheal's voice was brilliant and his dancing unsurpassed.

[Jaron]

I'll take Freddie Mercury in terms of voice/music talent and Madonna in terms of showbiz talent over Michael any time of the day. His music was kinda sucky. His voice was whiny.

You are entitled to your opinion, but it would seem the majority of the human race disagrees with you.

I'm not a big Michael Jackson fan personally but I can recognize and appreciate the man was extremely talented at what he did, even if his personal life was very disturbing.

[The Brain]

80s Michael Jackson ruled. He looked great, made awesome songs, sang and danced like a god. He was huge in a way no artist has been since (at least in Sweden).

[Martinus]

You're fucking crazy, Micheal's voice was brilliant and his dancing unsurpassed.

Tainted.

[Martinus]

So his fanbase is composed of retarded cripples, Mexican'ts and animal fuckers? Fitting. 

[Jaron]

So his fanbase is composed of retarded cripples, Mexican'ts and animal fuckers? Fitting. 

You wonder why no one likes you.