Opening Statements in Dr. Conrad Murray Trial

by John M. Curtis
(310) 204-8700

Copyright September 27, 2011
All Rights Reserved.                                         

           Opening arguments began today in the long-awaited trial of the late pop singer Michael Jackson’s personal doctor, 58-year-old Conrad Murray.  Los Angeles County District Attorney Steve Cooley charged Murray Feb. 8, 2010 with involuntary manslaughter in the propofol-induced June 25, 2009 death of the 50-year-old pop icon only hours after a full dress rehearsal of his comeback tour at Staples Center. When the Los Angeles County Coroner concluded Aug. 28, 2009 that Jackson died of a propofol overdose, it was only a matter of time before Murray was charged with involuntary manslaughter.  Murray’s trial is a critical test case for the line crossed between medical malpractice and criminal conduct.  Before the trial began, the American Medical Association weighed in that well-intentioned physicians shouldn’t face criminal charges for practicing medicine.

            Murray’s trial tests the limits of when malpractice crosses the line to criminal behavior.  When Murray claims he found Jackson lifeless in the morning of June 25, 2009, Murray spent at least 45 minutes talking on his cell phone, telling paramedics that he attempted Cardiac Pulmonary Resuscitation before their arrival.  Prosecutors seem focused on Murray’s failure to disclose to paramedics that he administered propofol to treat Jackson’s insomnia in the early morning of June 25.  “What happened during the time frame is that the acts and omissions of Michael Jackson’s personal doctor Conrad Murray directly led to his premature death at age 50,” said Deputy District Attorney David Walgren, understating the prosecution’s case that Murray engaged in “reckless negligence,” a prerequisite to involuntary manslaughter.  Customary treatments that result in death don’t constitute criminal acts.

            If prosecutors follow their current path, a jury will likely absolve Murray of criminal negligence.  Showing simply that Murray failed to monitor his patient properly or once the mishap took place failed to provide timely and effective life-saving measures doesn’t qualify as criminal negligence.  Proving that Murray ineptly handled the CPR or contact with paramedics also doesn’t qualify as involuntary manslaughter.  So far, Walgren made a case for medical malpractice, not criminal negligence.  If you run someone over accidentally in a crosswalk causing death, the vehicle operator isn’t typically charged with criminal negligence.  If the driver is found legally under the influence of drugs or alcohol, it crosses the criminal line.  Murray’s medical treatment can’t be regarded as reckless negligence unless it deviates from standardized and accepted medical practices.

            No doctor can invent dangerous treatments without medical precedents.  If they do invent a new treatment and the patient dies, then the line has been crossed into criminal negligence.  Instead of focusing on Murray’s lack of proper monitoring equipment, prosecutors should stay focused on whether or not Murray’s insomnia treatment was acceptable medical practice.  All indications point to reckless endangerment using an unprecedented medical treatment.  What Murray did or didn’t do after Jackson stopped breathing doesn’t tell you whether he crossed the line from medical malpractice to criminal negligence.  Prosecutors focus on errors and omissions could lead to a dead end, especially if Murray’s attorneys stay focus on the medical malpractice issue.  If the defense shows medical incompetence, not criminal negligence, then Murray gets off the hook.

            Patients die daily at the hands of incompetent physicians without getting prosecuted for criminal acts.  Civil courts are backed up with medical malpractice cases that don’t cross the criminal line.  What makes Murray’s case unique and falling into criminal behavior is creating of an operating-room type insomnia machine.  Using an operating room anesthetic to treat insomnia constitute reckless negligence even with a properly trained and certified anesthesiologist.  Murray’s lack of training or experience in anesthesia is only one part of his reckless homicide.  Prosecutors need to hammer home to the jury that there was no precedent for treating insomnia with an operating room anesthetic.  “That misplaced trust in Conrad Murray cost Michael Jackson his life,” said Walgren, still not helping the jury to see the difference between malpractice and criminal negligence.

            As the trial proceeds, prosecutors will try to show that Jackson followed Murray’s medical advice, eventually resulting in his death.  Defense counsel will counter that Jackson administered the lethal dose of propofol to himself, insisting that Murray only gave Michael a minimal, non-lethal 25 mg dose.  Prosecutors don’t need to show quantities to make their case of criminal negligence.  Nor to they need to show that Jackson was incapable of ingesting or injecting himself with a lethal dose.  Prosecutors need to stay focused on Murray’s operating room insomnia machine, asking medical experts whether they’ve ever heard of such a treatment.  Unless Murray’s attorneys can show some medical precedent treating insomnia with propofol, his lack of anesthesia training or expertise should cross the line into criminal negligence.  Jurors won’t take too kindly to Murray’s insomnia treatment.

John M. Curtis writes politically neutral commentary analyzing spin in national and global news.  He's editor of OnlineColumnist.com.and author of Dodging the Bullet and Operation Charisma.

©1999-2005 Discobolos Consulting Services, Inc.
(310) 204-8300
All Rights Reserved.