0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
I posted a pdf file of the 'jury instructions' a few pages back but I'm not sure if people actually read them. Based on those instructions, I honestly cannot see how this jury could've found Murray 'not guilty' of involuntary manslaughter. I may be missing something entirely or maybe misinterpreting the instructions (specifically the definition(s) under the 'Charged Crime' section)....but based on THOSE instructions/definitions, IMO the jury came up with the 'right' verdict (ANY jury that would've followed THOSE instructions in this case, would've and should've found any DOCTOR 'guilty' of involuntary manslaughter...regardless of age, sex, nationality, etc).Some are getting 'caught up' on the 'fatal dose' issue...but again, the instructions are VERY clear in that even IF MJ administered the 'fatal dose' himself, or some other person came in and injected MJ with it, Murray CAN still be guilty IF he should have been able to 'foresee' the possibility of this happening. Based on Murray's own statement(s), he said he knew Mike 'liked to push it', he also knew there were others in the house, and he also knew that the room was littered with drugs. So the 'fatal dose' factor is a non-issue with a charge of involuntary manslaughter....IF he was being charged with murder, then the 'reasonable doubt' as to who administered the fatal dose would've and should've come into play....but he was not charged with that crime. Again, the instructions are VERY clear on this issue.Like others, I tend to think that the DA is in on it (even if just Walgren) based on the 'odd' things that were said and done in court. But this 'script' was SO rock-solid for a guilty verdict (with the added bonus of a seemingly incompetant defense team)...that it probably wouldn't even have been necessary to have the DA in on it in order to ensure a guilty verdict. Based on what was presented in court (i.e. the 17 deviations from the standard of care, which were in many instances extreme deviations) the ONLY way IMO that this jury could've found Murray 'not guilty' is if they either didn't understand the instructions OR they intentionally went against them.Which takes us to the part in the instructions where the judge makes it VERY clear to the jury what they are 'allowed' to consider in their deliberations and what they're not...and the ONLY things they are to consider is ONLY what has been presented in court. It's 'easy' for us to notice discrepancies, inconsistencies, and/or outright 'fake' evidence...but we SEE everything through 'hoax-eyes'. It's hard to unring a bell once it's been rung...we have been awakened to all of the BS. Given the fact that 99% of the world thinks Mike is dead...odds are that all, or at least most, of the jury did too. But even IF they noticed that something wasn't quite right (and again, this would be difficult or 99% of the world wouldn't think Mike is dead)...but even IF they decided, for example, that the autopsy photo didn't look 'quite right' or any other 'evidence' presented in court for that matter....under THE LAW they are NOT allowed to look further into it on their own. The instructions, again, are VERY clear on this and we've discussed this very fact in this thread. The jury would've had to intentionally violate the instructions (the law) in order to research the 'oddities'....and IF they came back with a not guilty verdict based on their OWN research, the case is an automatic mistrial. It's a catch-22...in order to find the truth, they would've had to break the law....in breaking the law, the 'system' deems their 'truth' irrelevant.And THAT, in itself, should shed light on one of the major flaws in the judicial system where juries are involved. This is all just my opinion of course, but what the jury's verdict tells me is that they followed the law of the 'system' in making their decision....a 'system' that greatly limits a jury's ability to 'think for themselves'.With L.O.V.E. always.
There may be more than one cause of death. An act or a failure to perform a legal duty causes the death only if it is a substantial factor in causing the death. A substantial factor is more than a trivial or remote factor. However, it does not have to be the only factor that causes the death.To relieve a defendant of criminal liability, an intervening cause must be an unforeseeable and extraordinary occurence. A defendant remains criminally liable for the death if either the possible consequence might reasonably have been contemplated or the defendant should have foreseen the possibility of harm of the kind that could result from his or her act.The failure of the alleged victim Michael Joseph Jackson or another person to use reasonable care may have contributed to the death. However, if the defendant's act or the defendant's failure to perform a legal duty was a substantial factor causing the death, then the defendant is legally responsible for the death even though Michael Joseph Jackson or another person may have failed to use reasonable care.If you have a reasonable doubt whether the defendant's act or failure to perform a legal duty caused the death, you must find him not guilty.
Since the verdict I have become increasingly frustrated. We, have hid in our corner, and for the most part only told each other what we KNOW. We watched an innocent man get convicted of a crime he did not commit and done nothing. I don't know if it was a real trial or a kangaroo court. It sure as hell was presented to us as real wasn't it? I have enjoyed the hoax as much as anyone and will continue to do so but how long are we going to remain silent about what we know? We are already considered nuts but some and are mostly dismissed by others so what do we have to lose by demanding truth as one collective voice? Maybe, just maybe Michael wants us to do it. Maybe he told us once in a song...."I can't do it by myself." -Cry Our numbers are massive. We are everywhere. Every corner of the earth has a believer. If we are to truly be Michael's Army of Love than we need to start acting like it by DEMANDING TRUTH. We are the soldiers in TII's TDRCAU.I have tons more to say on the subject but will leavewith this for now. LOVE to all of you!!!! You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login /bravo/
BeTheChange, great post about the jury instructions regarding involuntary manslaughter - just what I've been trying to say, but you put it so well. Thanks!
Bec, Walgren's obvious KEY phrases and 'misspellings' can't be by accident, unless someone else prepared all of the documents and told him what to say, which in turn would mean he is completely featherbrained and unaware of any hoax. That I obviously doubt lol, he can't be that dumb. I also noticed you changed your stance on a/or--ANY-- sting?
Dear MJ family,I wanted to let you know that I'm still with you. Due to circumstances with work and friends it was not as intense as before but still I read (a little part of) the forum (almost) every day. I did not follow the trial day by day, so I am incredibly glad that, thanks to your extensive posts about it and also your thoughts about all other aspects, I'm still informed! I am so very grateful to all of you for this and I'm so impressed with all your research. I feel so guilty sometimes that I have not actively contributed that much in all of this lately. But I can not read all the topics. On an evening when I sit down I'm reading for a few hours and then I'm up to date in only one thread! What I do want to say to Michael, if you ever decide to go with a whole new staff of employees, consider the loving ladies (and gentlemen?) here on the forum. I know and feel that there is no group of people more loving, loyal, devoted and honest around the world then you will find here. I'm sure these people are going through flames for you and it certainly gives you the peace you so deserve!I will never lose my faith in you and I wait quietly but impatiently on your sign!
You are not allowed to view links. Register or LoginSince the verdict I have become increasingly frustrated. We, have hid in our corner, and for the most part only told each other what we KNOW. We watched an innocent man get convicted of a crime he did not commit and done nothing. I don't know if it was a real trial or a kangaroo court. It sure as hell was presented to us as real wasn't it? I have enjoyed the hoax as much as anyone and will continue to do so but how long are we going to remain silent about what we know? We are already considered nuts but some and are mostly dismissed by others so what do we have to lose by demanding truth as one collective voice? Maybe, just maybe Michael wants us to do it. Maybe he told us once in a song...."I can't do it by myself." -Cry Our numbers are massive. We are everywhere. Every corner of the earth has a believer. If we are to truly be Michael's Army of Love than we need to start acting like it by DEMANDING TRUTH. We are the soldiers in TII's TDRCAU.I have tons more to say on the subject but will leavewith this for now. LOVE to all of you!!!! You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login /bravo/That's an interesting way to look at the current situation, Monster. If MJDHI were to write a collective letter to, I don't know who, the judge maybe, stating why we think the verdict was the wrong one, would that be action, interaction or interferance?I tend to think there is no need, because believing in the hoax, I think MJ is in control and that the verdict is as he wants it - if not and he wants our help, he only has to ask - I'm pretty sure there are several here that he's in contact with!