Criminal Law Consulting
​For Writers & Filmmakers
  • Home
  • About
  • Services
  • Resources
  • Blog
  • Contact
  • Free eBook

Why Michael Jackson's Doctor Wasn't Charged With Murder

9/28/2011

 
Many fans were upset when Michael Jackson's doctor, Conrad Murray, wasn't charged with murder.  After hearing a preview of the evidence in yesterday's opening statements, it seems clear why Dr. Murray is not facing a murder charge.

Murder in California requires that the killer acted with a state of mind called "malice aforethought," which is generally referred to simply as malice.  Malice may be either express or implied.  

Express malice is where the defendant intended to kill.  There is no evidence that Dr. Murray intended to kill Michael Jackson.  Indeed, it appears that Michael Jackson's death cost Dr. Murray a lucrative contract of $150,000 per month to be Michael Jackson's personal physician.  Dr. Murray thus had every incentive to keep Michael Jackson alive.

Implied malice occurs when:  1) the defendant intentionally committed an act, the natural consequences of which were dangerous to human life, 2) at the time he acted, he knew the act was dangerous to human life, and 3) he did the act with a conscious disregard for human life.

There is a stronger case for implied malice than express malice here.  The combination and amount of drugs found in Michael Jackson's system have been described as extraordinarily high.  However, if Michael Jackson was an addict who had developed a high tolerance for these medications, and if Dr. Murray had been giving Michael Jackson similar doses in the months prior to his death without issue, he would have a strong argument that he did not act with a conscious disregard for human life.  Similarly, if Dr. Murray was attempting to wean Michael Jackson off the more dangerous drugs, like Propofol, as he claims, he could argue that he was not acting with a conscious disregard for human life. 

However, such arguments will have a harder time overcoming the "criminal negligence" standard for involuntary manslaughter.  (See posts from yesterday and the day before for more information on criminal negligence and involuntary manslaughter.) 

Sometimes overcharging a case can backfire and lead to an acquittal (like some suggest happened in the Casey Anthony case).  The DA's office likely charged conservatively to have a better chance of success, and the charge of involuntary manslaughter is really a better fit for the evidence here (as discussed yesterday). 

Comments are closed.
    Get your FREE E-Book revealing The Top 7 Mistakes Made by Writers of Crime, Mystery and Legal Drama:
    Send My Free E-Book!

    Author

    Blythe Leszkay is a successful and experienced criminal attorney, criminal law professor, and consultant to writers and filmmakers.  See About Me.  This blog is intended to answer common criminal law questions, dispel misconceptions, and explain misunderstood criminal law concepts.  It is also a place to discuss any crime or law related topics of interest.  Contact me for a free initial consultation on your film or writing project.

    Categories

    All
    Appeals
    Burden Of Proof
    Celebrity Crime
    Common Questions
    Constitution
    Consulting Services
    Courtroom
    Crime In The News
    Crime Novels
    Crime Tv
    Death Penalty
    Defenses
    Evidence
    Extortion
    Hate Crimes
    International Crime
    Juvenile Crime
    Legal Comedy
    Legal Definitions
    Legal Drama
    Manslaughter
    Movies
    Murder
    Search And Seizure
    Serial Killers
    Sex Crimes
    Supreme Court
    Trial
    True Crime
    Writing Tips

    RSS Feed

      Get Email Updates

    Join!
    Loading
Powered by Create your own unique website with customizable templates.