Tweet
Tom Mesereau hat sich in einem Interview bei CNN über die Anklage der fahrlässigen Tötung geäussert:
MESEREAU: Well, it may be more than gross negligence, but the question is, what do the prosecution think they can prove?
You know, I`ve defended cases, you know, where prosecutors had a good case for assault and they brought in attempted murder and I looked at the jury and said they shouldn`t have brought attempted murder. They`re not credible. They`re misusing their power. Don`t believe anything they say.
And that could happen here if they bring a second-degree murder charge and can`t prove it. I`d rather bring involuntary manslaughter and convict him than run the risk of having him go free on everything because you overcharged a case you couldn`t prove.
Nun es könnte natürlich mehr als grob fahrlässig sein, aber die Frage ist, was glaubt die Staatsanwaltschaft beweisen zu können ?
Wie sie wissen, habe ich immer Fälle eisern verteidigt, bei denen die Staatsanwaltschaft einen guten Fall von einer Körperverletzung hatte, sie aber Anklage wegen versuchten Mordes erhob und ich sah die Jury an und sagte sie hätten nicht auf versuchten Morders anklagen sollen, sie sind nicht glaubhaft. Sie missbrauchen ihre Macht. Glauben Sie nicht alles, was sie sagen.
Und das könnte hier passieren, wenn sie eine Anklage wegen Mordes 2. Grades verkünden und es nicht beweisen können. ich würde lieber eine Anklage wegen fahrlässiger Tötung erheben und ihn darauf verurteilen als Gefahr zu laufen, ihn in allem frei lassen zu müssen weil man die Anklage zu hoch angesetzt hat und sie nicht beweisen konnte.
Der gesamte Interviewausschnitt:
Now we are going to get the big picture from a man who knows Michael Jackson perhaps better than anybody. Noted attorney Tom Mesereau won across-the-board acquittals for Michael in the 2005 child molestation case that transfixed the world.
Tom, so glad to have you here on ISSUES tonight. You know, we haven`t talked since Michael Jackson died, and I know you became very close to Michael. What was your reaction when you heard he had died and under these very disturbing circumstances?
TOM MESEREAU, FORMER MICHAEL JACKSON DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Well, at first I was hoping it was just a rumor, because so many crazy rumors used to circulate about Michael. And then I was in the middle of a jury trial in federal court in Los Angeles. I called my office, and my office machine was filled with media requests from around the world. And then I had a very bad feeling that it might be correct.
And when I realized he truly had passed away, I was just horrified. I was shocked. I still am in shock. You know, I hear his music every day. I feel like he`s still with me. He`s still with all of us. It`s a terrible situation.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: Now, of course Dr. Murray has said that Michael Jackson was very familiar with Propofol, the drug that is believed to have killed him, which Dr. Conrad Murray admits to having administered to him, along with five doses of other sedatives. He says that Jackson referred to Propofol, this surgical knockout drug, as his milk.
Were you aware when you got close to Michael Jackson during this trial of him having insomnia or needing something like Propofol, a surgical knockout drug, to go to sleep?
MESEREAU: I never heard him mention Propofol or any prescription drug whatsoever. He certainly was having sleep problems. He was having trouble eating. He was depressed. Anyone in a five-month criminal trial like that would go through all of these situations. I mean, none of this was unusual.
I assumed if he was getting assistance in sleeping or dealing with anxiety, you know that would not be abnormal. But I never heard anyone mention Propofol or any other prescription drug.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: So you believe that this is something that if, it did develop, developed after the trial.
Was he depressed about the trial even though he was acquitted on all counts? It was a stunning victory for him and for you. We were all there the day the verdict came down. It`s one of the most dramatic days that I`ll remember in my life. But nevertheless, some said that he was depressed after that. Could he have needed the Propofol because of that?
MESEREAU: Well, I don`t like the words need Propofol. He probably needed some medical and psychiatric assistance, because he had spent five months sitting in trial five days a week, hearing people hurl accusations at him that were false and untrue and very malicious in nature.
To go through five months of that with the world media saying you`re going to be convicted and be worried about your children and your family and then suddenly be exonerated doesn`t take away all the hurt and the pain. And to not have slept, to have been very worried and depressed for all that time would hurt anybody.
But you don`t give somebody Propofol just because they know about it or someone else mentioned to them. You give them Propofol because it`s appropriate. And every doctor I`ve talked to says it should never be in a home and it should only be administered by an anesthesiologist. So the fact that...
VELEZ-MITCHELL: Tom?
MESEREAU: Yes.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: Hang in there, because we are so excited to talk to you. We`re going to be back in just a moment...
MESEREAU: OK.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: ... with more questions for Tom Mesereau.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
VELEZ-MITCHELL: So we`re getting insight on the latest chaos surrounding this case from a man who knows perhaps more than anybody else about Michael Jackson. I`m delighted again to have Tom Mesereau as my guest here on ISSUES.
Tom, of course, the attorney who famously and successfully defended Michael Jackson in his 2005 molestation trial. Tom, what do you make of the Jackson`s family contention that Dr. Murray should face a murder charge as opposed to the involuntary manslaughter charge that`s expected on Monday?
TOM MESEREAU, MICHAEL JACKSON`S ATTORNEY: I understand it completely from an emotional standpoint; the family and the fans want to see a murder charge. But you got to be careful with that from a practical standpoint. If the prosecutors bring murder charge and they can`t prove it, the jury may discredit everything they say and acquit him of both murder and involuntary manslaughter. I`d rather see them bring involuntary manslaughter if they know they can prove it and get a conviction that sticks.
But from an emotional stand I understand the family, I understand...
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DR. CONRAD MURRAY, MICHAEL JACKSON`S DOCTOR: I want to thank all of my patients and friends...
(END VIDEO CLIP)
VELEZ-MITCHELL: Yes. Let me ask you this, though. We have the issue of the five sedatives he gave Michael. He admits that; then the Propofol with Lidocaine. Then you have the delay of more than an hour once he comes back and he sees Michael stop breathing before 911 is called. Then you have him doing CPR on the bed when everybody knows should you do that CPR on a flat surface.
Then you have the fact that the paramedics thought he was dead there and said, "Let`s just say he`s dead now". And he`s saying, "No, no, no. We`re going to go to the hospital." And then he was finally pronounced dead late in the afternoon.
A lot of people say all of that is more than just gross negligence. What do you say?
MESEREAU: Well, it may be more than gross negligence, but the question is, what do the prosecution think they can prove?
You know, I`ve defended cases, you know, where prosecutors had a good case for assault and they brought in attempted murder and I looked at the jury and said they shouldn`t have brought attempted murder. They`re not credible. They`re misusing their power. Don`t believe anything they say.
And that could happen here if they bring a second-degree murder charge and can`t prove it. I`d rather bring involuntary manslaughter and convict him than run the risk of having him go free on everything because you overcharged a case you couldn`t prove.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: Very good point.
Now, let`s talk about the rehearsals for Jackson`s last concert tour. They were taped; eventually made into a movie. I`m sure you saw it Tom. I certainly did; amazing movie. Check it out from "This Is It" Sony Pictures.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This is the moment. This is it. It`s an adventure, a great adventure. You want to take them places that they`ve never been before, want to show them talent like they`ve never seen before.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
VELEZ-MITCHELL: Tom, when I saw this movie, I was shocked. Michael was so incredibly energetic, coordinated; dancing like a teenager. But at the trial when I saw him every day with you, he looked so weak sometimes. Sometimes he -- after the trial we saw him in a wheelchair. How do you reconcile those two totally different persons?
MESEREAU: Well, time passed. You know, between the end of the trial in 2005 and when you he began these rehearsals. I would like to think that he got himself in a better physical state, that he had some emotional counseling and he was helping himself do much better with life.
He knew that I got up at 3:00 in the morning every day during the five month trial. I was in bed at 7:30; I was up at 3:00. He would call me at 3:00 or 4:00 and often be crying about his children. He was a nervous wreck over this thing.
Michael was a very sensitive, creative, kind-hearted genius. He didn`t belong in that courtroom and he was treated horribly in that trial. I`m sure it took him a long time to recover, if he ever did.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: Tom Mesereau, could I talk to you every night and I always say every time I see you, if I`m ever in trouble, you`re the person I`m calling. I have you on my speed dial.
MESEREAU: Thank you.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: Thanks again for coming on. It`s always great to see you. Thank you.
MESEREAU: I appreciate it Jane.
Quelle: http://edition.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1002/05/ijvm.01.html
MESEREAU: Well, it may be more than gross negligence, but the question is, what do the prosecution think they can prove?
You know, I`ve defended cases, you know, where prosecutors had a good case for assault and they brought in attempted murder and I looked at the jury and said they shouldn`t have brought attempted murder. They`re not credible. They`re misusing their power. Don`t believe anything they say.
And that could happen here if they bring a second-degree murder charge and can`t prove it. I`d rather bring involuntary manslaughter and convict him than run the risk of having him go free on everything because you overcharged a case you couldn`t prove.
Nun es könnte natürlich mehr als grob fahrlässig sein, aber die Frage ist, was glaubt die Staatsanwaltschaft beweisen zu können ?
Wie sie wissen, habe ich immer Fälle eisern verteidigt, bei denen die Staatsanwaltschaft einen guten Fall von einer Körperverletzung hatte, sie aber Anklage wegen versuchten Mordes erhob und ich sah die Jury an und sagte sie hätten nicht auf versuchten Morders anklagen sollen, sie sind nicht glaubhaft. Sie missbrauchen ihre Macht. Glauben Sie nicht alles, was sie sagen.
Und das könnte hier passieren, wenn sie eine Anklage wegen Mordes 2. Grades verkünden und es nicht beweisen können. ich würde lieber eine Anklage wegen fahrlässiger Tötung erheben und ihn darauf verurteilen als Gefahr zu laufen, ihn in allem frei lassen zu müssen weil man die Anklage zu hoch angesetzt hat und sie nicht beweisen konnte.
Der gesamte Interviewausschnitt:
Now we are going to get the big picture from a man who knows Michael Jackson perhaps better than anybody. Noted attorney Tom Mesereau won across-the-board acquittals for Michael in the 2005 child molestation case that transfixed the world.
Tom, so glad to have you here on ISSUES tonight. You know, we haven`t talked since Michael Jackson died, and I know you became very close to Michael. What was your reaction when you heard he had died and under these very disturbing circumstances?
TOM MESEREAU, FORMER MICHAEL JACKSON DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Well, at first I was hoping it was just a rumor, because so many crazy rumors used to circulate about Michael. And then I was in the middle of a jury trial in federal court in Los Angeles. I called my office, and my office machine was filled with media requests from around the world. And then I had a very bad feeling that it might be correct.
And when I realized he truly had passed away, I was just horrified. I was shocked. I still am in shock. You know, I hear his music every day. I feel like he`s still with me. He`s still with all of us. It`s a terrible situation.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: Now, of course Dr. Murray has said that Michael Jackson was very familiar with Propofol, the drug that is believed to have killed him, which Dr. Conrad Murray admits to having administered to him, along with five doses of other sedatives. He says that Jackson referred to Propofol, this surgical knockout drug, as his milk.
Were you aware when you got close to Michael Jackson during this trial of him having insomnia or needing something like Propofol, a surgical knockout drug, to go to sleep?
MESEREAU: I never heard him mention Propofol or any prescription drug whatsoever. He certainly was having sleep problems. He was having trouble eating. He was depressed. Anyone in a five-month criminal trial like that would go through all of these situations. I mean, none of this was unusual.
I assumed if he was getting assistance in sleeping or dealing with anxiety, you know that would not be abnormal. But I never heard anyone mention Propofol or any other prescription drug.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: So you believe that this is something that if, it did develop, developed after the trial.
Was he depressed about the trial even though he was acquitted on all counts? It was a stunning victory for him and for you. We were all there the day the verdict came down. It`s one of the most dramatic days that I`ll remember in my life. But nevertheless, some said that he was depressed after that. Could he have needed the Propofol because of that?
MESEREAU: Well, I don`t like the words need Propofol. He probably needed some medical and psychiatric assistance, because he had spent five months sitting in trial five days a week, hearing people hurl accusations at him that were false and untrue and very malicious in nature.
To go through five months of that with the world media saying you`re going to be convicted and be worried about your children and your family and then suddenly be exonerated doesn`t take away all the hurt and the pain. And to not have slept, to have been very worried and depressed for all that time would hurt anybody.
But you don`t give somebody Propofol just because they know about it or someone else mentioned to them. You give them Propofol because it`s appropriate. And every doctor I`ve talked to says it should never be in a home and it should only be administered by an anesthesiologist. So the fact that...
VELEZ-MITCHELL: Tom?
MESEREAU: Yes.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: Hang in there, because we are so excited to talk to you. We`re going to be back in just a moment...
MESEREAU: OK.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: ... with more questions for Tom Mesereau.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
VELEZ-MITCHELL: So we`re getting insight on the latest chaos surrounding this case from a man who knows perhaps more than anybody else about Michael Jackson. I`m delighted again to have Tom Mesereau as my guest here on ISSUES.
Tom, of course, the attorney who famously and successfully defended Michael Jackson in his 2005 molestation trial. Tom, what do you make of the Jackson`s family contention that Dr. Murray should face a murder charge as opposed to the involuntary manslaughter charge that`s expected on Monday?
TOM MESEREAU, MICHAEL JACKSON`S ATTORNEY: I understand it completely from an emotional standpoint; the family and the fans want to see a murder charge. But you got to be careful with that from a practical standpoint. If the prosecutors bring murder charge and they can`t prove it, the jury may discredit everything they say and acquit him of both murder and involuntary manslaughter. I`d rather see them bring involuntary manslaughter if they know they can prove it and get a conviction that sticks.
But from an emotional stand I understand the family, I understand...
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DR. CONRAD MURRAY, MICHAEL JACKSON`S DOCTOR: I want to thank all of my patients and friends...
(END VIDEO CLIP)
VELEZ-MITCHELL: Yes. Let me ask you this, though. We have the issue of the five sedatives he gave Michael. He admits that; then the Propofol with Lidocaine. Then you have the delay of more than an hour once he comes back and he sees Michael stop breathing before 911 is called. Then you have him doing CPR on the bed when everybody knows should you do that CPR on a flat surface.
Then you have the fact that the paramedics thought he was dead there and said, "Let`s just say he`s dead now". And he`s saying, "No, no, no. We`re going to go to the hospital." And then he was finally pronounced dead late in the afternoon.
A lot of people say all of that is more than just gross negligence. What do you say?
MESEREAU: Well, it may be more than gross negligence, but the question is, what do the prosecution think they can prove?
You know, I`ve defended cases, you know, where prosecutors had a good case for assault and they brought in attempted murder and I looked at the jury and said they shouldn`t have brought attempted murder. They`re not credible. They`re misusing their power. Don`t believe anything they say.
And that could happen here if they bring a second-degree murder charge and can`t prove it. I`d rather bring involuntary manslaughter and convict him than run the risk of having him go free on everything because you overcharged a case you couldn`t prove.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: Very good point.
Now, let`s talk about the rehearsals for Jackson`s last concert tour. They were taped; eventually made into a movie. I`m sure you saw it Tom. I certainly did; amazing movie. Check it out from "This Is It" Sony Pictures.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This is the moment. This is it. It`s an adventure, a great adventure. You want to take them places that they`ve never been before, want to show them talent like they`ve never seen before.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
VELEZ-MITCHELL: Tom, when I saw this movie, I was shocked. Michael was so incredibly energetic, coordinated; dancing like a teenager. But at the trial when I saw him every day with you, he looked so weak sometimes. Sometimes he -- after the trial we saw him in a wheelchair. How do you reconcile those two totally different persons?
MESEREAU: Well, time passed. You know, between the end of the trial in 2005 and when you he began these rehearsals. I would like to think that he got himself in a better physical state, that he had some emotional counseling and he was helping himself do much better with life.
He knew that I got up at 3:00 in the morning every day during the five month trial. I was in bed at 7:30; I was up at 3:00. He would call me at 3:00 or 4:00 and often be crying about his children. He was a nervous wreck over this thing.
Michael was a very sensitive, creative, kind-hearted genius. He didn`t belong in that courtroom and he was treated horribly in that trial. I`m sure it took him a long time to recover, if he ever did.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: Tom Mesereau, could I talk to you every night and I always say every time I see you, if I`m ever in trouble, you`re the person I`m calling. I have you on my speed dial.
MESEREAU: Thank you.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: Thanks again for coming on. It`s always great to see you. Thank you.
MESEREAU: I appreciate it Jane.
Quelle: http://edition.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1002/05/ijvm.01.html
Kommentar