Tweet
Und hier noch mein Transkript der Urteilsbegründung von Richter Pastor - gibt zwar bereits eine Übersetzung, aber ich stell es trotzdem mal ein -
~
One of the most difficult aspects of the job of judging is to impose an appropriate just and fair sentence. It´s never an easy or fun responsibility. It´s even more complicated when a judge is confounded with discretionary choices. In many of our cases the terms are set in stone and the judge has no discretion. But when a judge is called upon to exercise discretion it´s a very significate responsibility. And that responsibility is compounded in a case such as this where neither party is saying that Dr. Murray acted intentionally. In being responsible for the death of the decedant, Michael Jackson, even the people just acknowledged that Dr. Murray did not intend for Mr. Jackson to die.
So the court is called upon to utilise it´s sense of fairness and decency as well as various factors in this gained over the years of it´s experience and fashioning what it believes is an appropriate sentence in this case.
There are those who feel that Dr. Murray is a saint. There are those who feel Dr. Muray is the devil. He´s neither. He´s a human being. He stands convicted of the death of another human being. And that death is predicated not on simple civil negligence, but on criminal negligence. And it´s important for the court to realise that that is the appropriate standard. The standard of criminal or gross negligence and the fact that a jury of twelve people from remarkably different backgrounds and life experiences concluded unanimously and beyond a reasonable doubt that Dr. Murray had with criminal negligence caused the death of Michael Jackson.
It´s important to emphazise the standard of criminal negligence found by this jury beyond a reasonable doubt because some may feel this was a medical malpractice case. It wasn´t. It was an easy criminal homicide case. And this jury found beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant with criminal negligence caused the death of Michael Jackson. And criminal negligence is defined as follows:
Criminal negligence involves more than ordinary carelessness, inattention or mistake in judgement.
A person acts or fails to perform a legal duty with criminal negligence when
1. He or she acts or fails to perform a legal duty in a reckless way that creates a high risk of death or great bodily injury
2. A reasonable person would have known that acting or failing to perform a legal duty in that way would create such a risk
A person acts with criminal negligence when the way he or she acts is so different from the way an ordinarily careful person would act in the same situation that his or her act amounts to disregard for human life or in difference to the consequences of that act.
It´s important to remember and focus on those terms and not to treat them cavalierly as some might by saying: “Oh well, it just happened. And, oh well, if it worked for Dr. Murray, someone else may have been involved.” I categorically disassociate myself from those types of statements. This is not a question about what might have happened or what if someone else had been involved if not for Dr. Murray. That is an insult to the medical profession. The fact is that Michael Jackson died because of the actions of and the failures to perform the legal duties on the part of Dr. Murray. Not some other medical doctor, and also not exclusively because of Michael Jackson.
I accept Mr. Chernoff´s invitation to read the whole book, and I have. I´ve been impressed by the submissions from family and friends and associates of Dr. Murray. It is a book of Dr. Murray´s life, but I´ve also read the book of Michael Jackson´s life. Not isolated chapters from either.
Regrettably as for as Dr. Murray is concerned, the most significant chapter as it relates to this case is the chapter involving the treatment or lack of treatment of Michael Jackson. And Michael Jackson died not because of an isolated one of occurrence or incident. He died because of a totality of circumstances which are directly attributable to Dr. Murray.
Not some mistake or some accident in the early morning hours of June 25 of 2009 but because of a series of decisions that Dr. Murray made would jeopardized his patient, which violated his obligations to his patient and the essence of his hippocratic oath.
Those violations overcome the other aspects of Dr. Murray´s treatment of other patients and the good deeds he may have done before that time.
Dr. Murray created a set of circumstances and became involved in a cycle of horrible medicine.The practice of propofol for a medicine madness which violated his sworn obligation for money, fame, prestige and whatever else may have occurred.
So, I don´t look to one isolated incident in terms of the misdeeds of Dr. Murray or the deeds of Dr. Murray. But in so far as this case is concerned Dr. Murray engaged in a recurring continuous pattern of deceit, of lies, and regrettably that pattern was to assist Dr. Murray.
It is almost inconceivable that Dr. Murray would have persisted in this pattern over such an extensive period of time.
The lies, the deceit began and continued as we heard for six weeks worth of testimony to build up an absolutely astounding set of circumstances. The lies from the inception of his medical relationship at the Holmby Hills residence in terms of ordering Propofol in staggering quantities, unprecendented quantities. The lies to the pharmacy and to the pharmacist. The sophisticated intentional deception in that regard, the lies and repeated deception to those associated with Mr. Jackson, whether it be members of the staff and also members of the production team, AEG, and Mr. Jackson´s personal and professional associates.
The continuing series of lies to Michael Jackson´s security and staff personnel, an incredible point in time, the unconscionable lies to health care providers, live savers, paramedics and medical personnel at UCLA who are not designed to help his patient ? which were designed to deceive and give Dr. Murray a way out. The efforts on the part of Dr. Murray to subvert the process by attempting to destroy evidence. Susequent efforts to cover up by distortions and lies to law enforcement.
If one looks to the crime of involuntary manslaughter in a vacuum one can say this may be something that went terribly wrong and it´s tragic. But it´s so credibly important not to have a superficial got reaction to what happened in this case. But to look at the totality of circumstances in terms of the longstanding failure of character on the part of Dr. Murray to serve his patient. And when one does that one can help but the offended by the circumstances in this case.
Of everything I heard and saw during the course of the trial one aspect of the evidence stands out the most. And that is the surreptitious recording of Michael Jackson by his trusted doctor. And I have repeatedly asked myself: “Why did this happen? And for what reason?” And I can speculate and surmise that there might have been some justifiable reason, some benefit to Michael Jackson – that would be an untirely unreasonable conclusion.
That tape recording was Dr. Murray´s insurance policy. It was designed to record his patient surreptitiously at that patients most vulnerable point. I can´t even imagine that happening to any of us because of the horrific violation of trust. And I can´t help but wonder that if there had been some conflict between Michael Jackson and Dr. Murray at a later point in time in their relationship, what value would be placed on that tape recording if the choice were to release that tape recording to a media organisation to be used against Michael Jackson? And regrettably that failure of character was compouned by later actions on the part of Dr. Murray. Each of which amounted to a betrayal of trust, confidence and a clear violation of the doctor-patient relationship and an undermining of the phenomenal rule and responsibility that health care personnel, doctors, nurses, paramedics, healthcare aids perform in our society. We revere medical doctors, and we should, because thay work diligently and they serve and they make sacrefices to keep us well, An unquestionably Dr. Murray did that. But at some point things went terribly wrong for Dr. Murray. And when he had an opportunity he didn´t get out. He stayed in and he got deeper and deeper in trouble, and he betrayed the very oaths and tenets of his medical profession.
So, I do look at the totality of circumstances, and when I look to the totality of circumstances and when I look to the whole book, the book of Dr. Murray´s life, I loss a look to the chapter that disturbs me most, and that´s the chapter to which I referred.
I can´t say that my opinion changed after I became aware of the production involving Dr. Murray after the jury verdict in this case when Dr. Murray says: “I don´t feel guilty.” That´s what he says.
Mr. Chernoff acknowledges candidly that there is fault here but you´re not hearing it from Dr. Murray. You didn´t hear it at the time that Dr. Murray interacted with the security staff and the staff at the Holmby Hills property. You didn´t hear it from Dr. Murray when he encountered members of the paramedics squad, the paramedis Senneff and Blount. You certainly didn´t hear it when Dr. Murray encountered doctors Cooper and Nguyen who are on a life saving mission. You didn´t hear it when Dr. Murray talked to the detectives of LAPD. And you certainly didn´t hear it during Dr. Murray´s interview in this full documentary, full reality production where an Dr. Murray says: “I don´t feel guilty. I wasn´t reckless. I didn´t tell them about Propofol because they never asked the question. And it wasn´t important.” And where Dr. Murray at that point says he feels betrayed and entrapped by Michael Jackson. ?? Talk about blaming the victim! Not only isn´t there any remorse, there is umbrage and outrage on the part of Dr. Murray against this decedent without any, any indication of the slightest involvement in this case. To hear Dr. Murray say it, Dr. Murray is just a bystander who assert to came upon the scene and was put in this situation without because of anybody else´s ations, others then himself. Whether it be members of the family, whether it be members of AEG, whether it be Mr. Jackson or anybody else.
Those are factors which cause me tremendous concern. Because the essence of probation is a recognition that someone may have done something wrong, some responsibility, some remorse, why give probation to someone who is offended by the whole idea that that person is even before the court?
You can´t have probation when there isn´t an ackowledgement of rehabilitation and responsibility. And regrettably Dr. Murray doesn´t have an either. Dr. Murray certainly is statutorily allegeable for probation.
I looked valuably for efforts to satisfy myself that while Dr. Murray was legally allegeable for probation, he was suitable for probation. And I really didn´t become convinced I could find any. Dr. Murray is allegeable for probation. The court declines for grand probation in this case for a host of reasons.
And in making that decision I acknowledge has throughout his 58 years provided services to the community and has helped many individuals.
But I also acknowledge that he unquestionably violated the trust and confidence of his patient Mr. Jackson on a repeated nightly bases. Michael Jackson as a patient was vulnerable because Dr. Murray put Mr. Jackson in a position where Dr. Murray was responsable for the very life of Mr. Jackson.
Dr. Murray engaged in a sophisticated scheme to obtain propofol through insidious means by line to the pharmazist, to concoct the story by not keeping records and by allowing his personal life to interfere with his professional responsablities.
At the very time that people are depending upon Dr. Murray to be canded with them regarding Mr. Jackson´s medical condition Dr. Murray is lying.
He´s lying to the AEG people, he´s lying to Mr. Ortega, he´s lying to the insurance carrier, and anybody else he can. And he is engaged in personal matters while he should be paying attention to his patient.
Anybody who takes an objective view of what was going on here has to come to an ineluctable conclusion: that Dr.Murray abandoned his patient. And this is not a simple one of occurs. This is an anacceptable egregious series of departures from the appopriate standard of care which undermine the physician-patient relationship and which are in disgrace to the medical profession.
An honorable profession which bares the blood, the scourge of what happened here, so again – were not talking about a single isolated mistake. What we´re talking about is a gross continuing deviation.
So, for those factors the court makes a determination that Dr. Murray is not a suitable candidate for a grand probation.
The request for a probation under the rules of court is tonight. The question then becomes what is the appropriate period of incarceration?
The court has many options including hybrid type sentences as authorized by the reallignment act of 2011 and the straight sentencing.
This court does not have the legal authority to actually send an imprisoned Dr. Murray in a state prison.
I do not have that legal authority and I am certainly going to follow the law in that regard. The legislature of this state signed a realignment act that declares certain offences while felonies not to be served in state prison, and involuntary manslaughter is one of those.
I do not have that legal authority. I must determine the appropriate sentence and in making that determination the court is guided by a triade of possible sentences. That court can impose two, three or four years. The court no longer has to weight wether called aggravating circumstances or factors versus mitigating circumstances or factors but has to give a statement of reasons.
The court has determined that the appropriate term is the high term of four years imprisonment.
I do so because once again I find that Dr.Murray abandoned his patient who was trusting him. His patient was vulnerable at those circumstances having been administered potentially dangerous drugs by his medical provider. Dr.Murray´s course of conduct extended over a period of time. Dr. Murray repeatedly lied engaged in the sequel misconduct and endeavored to cover up his transgressions. He violated the trust of the medical community, of his colleagues and of his patient and he has absolutely no sense of remorse, absolutely no sense of fault and is and remains dangerous!
It´s easy to say: “Oh well, Dr. Murray is a medical doctor. He is a smart sophisticated man. He does not have a criminal history. He may not be licensed to practice medicine in the future.” All that has nothing to do with me. I have no authority over that. The fact remains Dr. Murray is offended by that patient diying. And I don´t have any idea what will prompt Dr. Murray to do or not do something in the future that may be dangerous to a patient if he does practice medicine in the United States or even elsewhere. I think Dr. Murray is so reckless based upon the law and the definition of criminal negligence that I read and everything that I heard and saw in this case and Dr. Murray´s subsequent conduct that I believe he is a danger for the community.
I´ve taken it to count all of the factors, I´ve stated my reasons. And those reasons, the nature and character of the offense distinguish this charge of involuntary manslaughter in this case, and this conviction of involuntarity in this case from other cases involving involutary manslaughter, and there is a fundable aspect of the criminal justice system which is involved here – and that is the fundamentle aspect of punishment.
It should be made very that experimental medicine is not gonna be tolerated. And Mr. Jackson was an experiment. The fact that he participated in it does not excuse or lessen the blame of Dr. Murray who simply could have walked away and said “No” as countless others did.
Dr.Murray was entrigued by the prospect and he engaged in this money for a medicine madness that is simply not gonna be tolerated by me.
So, as the sentencing in this case, the request for provation is denied, the court imposes the high term of four years imprisonment in this case pursuing to the realignment act of 2011 and the provisions of penal code section 1170 subdevision H. That four years sentence is to be served in the Los Angeles county jail under the care, supervision and direction of the Los Angeles County sheriff.
Dr.Murray is to pay an 800 Dollar restitution file pursuing to the prevations of penal code section 1202.4 and the statutory scheme therein, 830 dollar court security fee presuing to penal code section 1465.8 Subdevison A Paragraph 1, and a 40 dollar criminal conviction assessment pursuing to government code section 70373. As a convicted felon Dr. Murray is ordered to provide specimens and samples of blood, saliva, finger prints and palm prints for law inforcement investigated purposes and the state DNA data bank, and his willful refusal to provide any specimens and samples is a separate crime.
I am concerned about the restitution requests in this case. I sense that the people and the defense share those concerns. It´s not often that courts are called upon to order restitution in the sum of 101 million 821 thousand 871 dollar and 65 cents, based upon a three-lined statement in an email. An electronic mail. So the court is going to order Dr. Murray to pay appropriate restitution to the estate of Michael Jackson and to the children and other family of Michael Jackson. Pursuing to the prevations of penal code section 1202.4 and the case of People vs. Lunsford at 67 Caleb Forth 901 in the amount and manner as determined by this court at a later restitution hearing where the court can be provided by the People through Mr. Weitzman and through anybody else with more detailed information.
Now. Mr. Walgren, as you know Mr. Weitzman indicated that the above information is a combination of moneys actually spent … well, I´d like to see it … and, quote: “some very sophisticated projections on the anticipated revenue stream from a constant that had been sold before Mr. Jacksons death”, end of quote.
I believe we´ve discussed various motions in this case, issues involving detailed financal records, certainly the defense and the people have been interested in those types of records for the ?? of this litigation. But before this court can order and will order any such restitution I need much more detailed information. And that may involve ? choices on the part of the Jackson family and on the part of the estate whether and under what circumstances those figures are to be released. But I´m not gonna order restitution of this juncture based upon those conclusory statements. And even when the court makes a determination the court can order that restitution be payed through the state office of revenue reimbursements. I´m happy to set this case at a later point in time for a determination of more detailed restitution amounts.
~
One of the most difficult aspects of the job of judging is to impose an appropriate just and fair sentence. It´s never an easy or fun responsibility. It´s even more complicated when a judge is confounded with discretionary choices. In many of our cases the terms are set in stone and the judge has no discretion. But when a judge is called upon to exercise discretion it´s a very significate responsibility. And that responsibility is compounded in a case such as this where neither party is saying that Dr. Murray acted intentionally. In being responsible for the death of the decedant, Michael Jackson, even the people just acknowledged that Dr. Murray did not intend for Mr. Jackson to die.
So the court is called upon to utilise it´s sense of fairness and decency as well as various factors in this gained over the years of it´s experience and fashioning what it believes is an appropriate sentence in this case.
There are those who feel that Dr. Murray is a saint. There are those who feel Dr. Muray is the devil. He´s neither. He´s a human being. He stands convicted of the death of another human being. And that death is predicated not on simple civil negligence, but on criminal negligence. And it´s important for the court to realise that that is the appropriate standard. The standard of criminal or gross negligence and the fact that a jury of twelve people from remarkably different backgrounds and life experiences concluded unanimously and beyond a reasonable doubt that Dr. Murray had with criminal negligence caused the death of Michael Jackson.
It´s important to emphazise the standard of criminal negligence found by this jury beyond a reasonable doubt because some may feel this was a medical malpractice case. It wasn´t. It was an easy criminal homicide case. And this jury found beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant with criminal negligence caused the death of Michael Jackson. And criminal negligence is defined as follows:
Criminal negligence involves more than ordinary carelessness, inattention or mistake in judgement.
A person acts or fails to perform a legal duty with criminal negligence when
1. He or she acts or fails to perform a legal duty in a reckless way that creates a high risk of death or great bodily injury
2. A reasonable person would have known that acting or failing to perform a legal duty in that way would create such a risk
A person acts with criminal negligence when the way he or she acts is so different from the way an ordinarily careful person would act in the same situation that his or her act amounts to disregard for human life or in difference to the consequences of that act.
It´s important to remember and focus on those terms and not to treat them cavalierly as some might by saying: “Oh well, it just happened. And, oh well, if it worked for Dr. Murray, someone else may have been involved.” I categorically disassociate myself from those types of statements. This is not a question about what might have happened or what if someone else had been involved if not for Dr. Murray. That is an insult to the medical profession. The fact is that Michael Jackson died because of the actions of and the failures to perform the legal duties on the part of Dr. Murray. Not some other medical doctor, and also not exclusively because of Michael Jackson.
I accept Mr. Chernoff´s invitation to read the whole book, and I have. I´ve been impressed by the submissions from family and friends and associates of Dr. Murray. It is a book of Dr. Murray´s life, but I´ve also read the book of Michael Jackson´s life. Not isolated chapters from either.
Regrettably as for as Dr. Murray is concerned, the most significant chapter as it relates to this case is the chapter involving the treatment or lack of treatment of Michael Jackson. And Michael Jackson died not because of an isolated one of occurrence or incident. He died because of a totality of circumstances which are directly attributable to Dr. Murray.
Not some mistake or some accident in the early morning hours of June 25 of 2009 but because of a series of decisions that Dr. Murray made would jeopardized his patient, which violated his obligations to his patient and the essence of his hippocratic oath.
Those violations overcome the other aspects of Dr. Murray´s treatment of other patients and the good deeds he may have done before that time.
Dr. Murray created a set of circumstances and became involved in a cycle of horrible medicine.The practice of propofol for a medicine madness which violated his sworn obligation for money, fame, prestige and whatever else may have occurred.
So, I don´t look to one isolated incident in terms of the misdeeds of Dr. Murray or the deeds of Dr. Murray. But in so far as this case is concerned Dr. Murray engaged in a recurring continuous pattern of deceit, of lies, and regrettably that pattern was to assist Dr. Murray.
It is almost inconceivable that Dr. Murray would have persisted in this pattern over such an extensive period of time.
The lies, the deceit began and continued as we heard for six weeks worth of testimony to build up an absolutely astounding set of circumstances. The lies from the inception of his medical relationship at the Holmby Hills residence in terms of ordering Propofol in staggering quantities, unprecendented quantities. The lies to the pharmacy and to the pharmacist. The sophisticated intentional deception in that regard, the lies and repeated deception to those associated with Mr. Jackson, whether it be members of the staff and also members of the production team, AEG, and Mr. Jackson´s personal and professional associates.
The continuing series of lies to Michael Jackson´s security and staff personnel, an incredible point in time, the unconscionable lies to health care providers, live savers, paramedics and medical personnel at UCLA who are not designed to help his patient ? which were designed to deceive and give Dr. Murray a way out. The efforts on the part of Dr. Murray to subvert the process by attempting to destroy evidence. Susequent efforts to cover up by distortions and lies to law enforcement.
If one looks to the crime of involuntary manslaughter in a vacuum one can say this may be something that went terribly wrong and it´s tragic. But it´s so credibly important not to have a superficial got reaction to what happened in this case. But to look at the totality of circumstances in terms of the longstanding failure of character on the part of Dr. Murray to serve his patient. And when one does that one can help but the offended by the circumstances in this case.
Of everything I heard and saw during the course of the trial one aspect of the evidence stands out the most. And that is the surreptitious recording of Michael Jackson by his trusted doctor. And I have repeatedly asked myself: “Why did this happen? And for what reason?” And I can speculate and surmise that there might have been some justifiable reason, some benefit to Michael Jackson – that would be an untirely unreasonable conclusion.
That tape recording was Dr. Murray´s insurance policy. It was designed to record his patient surreptitiously at that patients most vulnerable point. I can´t even imagine that happening to any of us because of the horrific violation of trust. And I can´t help but wonder that if there had been some conflict between Michael Jackson and Dr. Murray at a later point in time in their relationship, what value would be placed on that tape recording if the choice were to release that tape recording to a media organisation to be used against Michael Jackson? And regrettably that failure of character was compouned by later actions on the part of Dr. Murray. Each of which amounted to a betrayal of trust, confidence and a clear violation of the doctor-patient relationship and an undermining of the phenomenal rule and responsibility that health care personnel, doctors, nurses, paramedics, healthcare aids perform in our society. We revere medical doctors, and we should, because thay work diligently and they serve and they make sacrefices to keep us well, An unquestionably Dr. Murray did that. But at some point things went terribly wrong for Dr. Murray. And when he had an opportunity he didn´t get out. He stayed in and he got deeper and deeper in trouble, and he betrayed the very oaths and tenets of his medical profession.
So, I do look at the totality of circumstances, and when I look to the totality of circumstances and when I look to the whole book, the book of Dr. Murray´s life, I loss a look to the chapter that disturbs me most, and that´s the chapter to which I referred.
I can´t say that my opinion changed after I became aware of the production involving Dr. Murray after the jury verdict in this case when Dr. Murray says: “I don´t feel guilty.” That´s what he says.
Mr. Chernoff acknowledges candidly that there is fault here but you´re not hearing it from Dr. Murray. You didn´t hear it at the time that Dr. Murray interacted with the security staff and the staff at the Holmby Hills property. You didn´t hear it from Dr. Murray when he encountered members of the paramedics squad, the paramedis Senneff and Blount. You certainly didn´t hear it when Dr. Murray encountered doctors Cooper and Nguyen who are on a life saving mission. You didn´t hear it when Dr. Murray talked to the detectives of LAPD. And you certainly didn´t hear it during Dr. Murray´s interview in this full documentary, full reality production where an Dr. Murray says: “I don´t feel guilty. I wasn´t reckless. I didn´t tell them about Propofol because they never asked the question. And it wasn´t important.” And where Dr. Murray at that point says he feels betrayed and entrapped by Michael Jackson. ?? Talk about blaming the victim! Not only isn´t there any remorse, there is umbrage and outrage on the part of Dr. Murray against this decedent without any, any indication of the slightest involvement in this case. To hear Dr. Murray say it, Dr. Murray is just a bystander who assert to came upon the scene and was put in this situation without because of anybody else´s ations, others then himself. Whether it be members of the family, whether it be members of AEG, whether it be Mr. Jackson or anybody else.
Those are factors which cause me tremendous concern. Because the essence of probation is a recognition that someone may have done something wrong, some responsibility, some remorse, why give probation to someone who is offended by the whole idea that that person is even before the court?
You can´t have probation when there isn´t an ackowledgement of rehabilitation and responsibility. And regrettably Dr. Murray doesn´t have an either. Dr. Murray certainly is statutorily allegeable for probation.
I looked valuably for efforts to satisfy myself that while Dr. Murray was legally allegeable for probation, he was suitable for probation. And I really didn´t become convinced I could find any. Dr. Murray is allegeable for probation. The court declines for grand probation in this case for a host of reasons.
And in making that decision I acknowledge has throughout his 58 years provided services to the community and has helped many individuals.
But I also acknowledge that he unquestionably violated the trust and confidence of his patient Mr. Jackson on a repeated nightly bases. Michael Jackson as a patient was vulnerable because Dr. Murray put Mr. Jackson in a position where Dr. Murray was responsable for the very life of Mr. Jackson.
Dr. Murray engaged in a sophisticated scheme to obtain propofol through insidious means by line to the pharmazist, to concoct the story by not keeping records and by allowing his personal life to interfere with his professional responsablities.
At the very time that people are depending upon Dr. Murray to be canded with them regarding Mr. Jackson´s medical condition Dr. Murray is lying.
He´s lying to the AEG people, he´s lying to Mr. Ortega, he´s lying to the insurance carrier, and anybody else he can. And he is engaged in personal matters while he should be paying attention to his patient.
Anybody who takes an objective view of what was going on here has to come to an ineluctable conclusion: that Dr.Murray abandoned his patient. And this is not a simple one of occurs. This is an anacceptable egregious series of departures from the appopriate standard of care which undermine the physician-patient relationship and which are in disgrace to the medical profession.
An honorable profession which bares the blood, the scourge of what happened here, so again – were not talking about a single isolated mistake. What we´re talking about is a gross continuing deviation.
So, for those factors the court makes a determination that Dr. Murray is not a suitable candidate for a grand probation.
The request for a probation under the rules of court is tonight. The question then becomes what is the appropriate period of incarceration?
The court has many options including hybrid type sentences as authorized by the reallignment act of 2011 and the straight sentencing.
This court does not have the legal authority to actually send an imprisoned Dr. Murray in a state prison.
I do not have that legal authority and I am certainly going to follow the law in that regard. The legislature of this state signed a realignment act that declares certain offences while felonies not to be served in state prison, and involuntary manslaughter is one of those.
I do not have that legal authority. I must determine the appropriate sentence and in making that determination the court is guided by a triade of possible sentences. That court can impose two, three or four years. The court no longer has to weight wether called aggravating circumstances or factors versus mitigating circumstances or factors but has to give a statement of reasons.
The court has determined that the appropriate term is the high term of four years imprisonment.
I do so because once again I find that Dr.Murray abandoned his patient who was trusting him. His patient was vulnerable at those circumstances having been administered potentially dangerous drugs by his medical provider. Dr.Murray´s course of conduct extended over a period of time. Dr. Murray repeatedly lied engaged in the sequel misconduct and endeavored to cover up his transgressions. He violated the trust of the medical community, of his colleagues and of his patient and he has absolutely no sense of remorse, absolutely no sense of fault and is and remains dangerous!
It´s easy to say: “Oh well, Dr. Murray is a medical doctor. He is a smart sophisticated man. He does not have a criminal history. He may not be licensed to practice medicine in the future.” All that has nothing to do with me. I have no authority over that. The fact remains Dr. Murray is offended by that patient diying. And I don´t have any idea what will prompt Dr. Murray to do or not do something in the future that may be dangerous to a patient if he does practice medicine in the United States or even elsewhere. I think Dr. Murray is so reckless based upon the law and the definition of criminal negligence that I read and everything that I heard and saw in this case and Dr. Murray´s subsequent conduct that I believe he is a danger for the community.
I´ve taken it to count all of the factors, I´ve stated my reasons. And those reasons, the nature and character of the offense distinguish this charge of involuntary manslaughter in this case, and this conviction of involuntarity in this case from other cases involving involutary manslaughter, and there is a fundable aspect of the criminal justice system which is involved here – and that is the fundamentle aspect of punishment.
It should be made very that experimental medicine is not gonna be tolerated. And Mr. Jackson was an experiment. The fact that he participated in it does not excuse or lessen the blame of Dr. Murray who simply could have walked away and said “No” as countless others did.
Dr.Murray was entrigued by the prospect and he engaged in this money for a medicine madness that is simply not gonna be tolerated by me.
So, as the sentencing in this case, the request for provation is denied, the court imposes the high term of four years imprisonment in this case pursuing to the realignment act of 2011 and the provisions of penal code section 1170 subdevision H. That four years sentence is to be served in the Los Angeles county jail under the care, supervision and direction of the Los Angeles County sheriff.
Dr.Murray is to pay an 800 Dollar restitution file pursuing to the prevations of penal code section 1202.4 and the statutory scheme therein, 830 dollar court security fee presuing to penal code section 1465.8 Subdevison A Paragraph 1, and a 40 dollar criminal conviction assessment pursuing to government code section 70373. As a convicted felon Dr. Murray is ordered to provide specimens and samples of blood, saliva, finger prints and palm prints for law inforcement investigated purposes and the state DNA data bank, and his willful refusal to provide any specimens and samples is a separate crime.
I am concerned about the restitution requests in this case. I sense that the people and the defense share those concerns. It´s not often that courts are called upon to order restitution in the sum of 101 million 821 thousand 871 dollar and 65 cents, based upon a three-lined statement in an email. An electronic mail. So the court is going to order Dr. Murray to pay appropriate restitution to the estate of Michael Jackson and to the children and other family of Michael Jackson. Pursuing to the prevations of penal code section 1202.4 and the case of People vs. Lunsford at 67 Caleb Forth 901 in the amount and manner as determined by this court at a later restitution hearing where the court can be provided by the People through Mr. Weitzman and through anybody else with more detailed information.
Now. Mr. Walgren, as you know Mr. Weitzman indicated that the above information is a combination of moneys actually spent … well, I´d like to see it … and, quote: “some very sophisticated projections on the anticipated revenue stream from a constant that had been sold before Mr. Jacksons death”, end of quote.
I believe we´ve discussed various motions in this case, issues involving detailed financal records, certainly the defense and the people have been interested in those types of records for the ?? of this litigation. But before this court can order and will order any such restitution I need much more detailed information. And that may involve ? choices on the part of the Jackson family and on the part of the estate whether and under what circumstances those figures are to be released. But I´m not gonna order restitution of this juncture based upon those conclusory statements. And even when the court makes a determination the court can order that restitution be payed through the state office of revenue reimbursements. I´m happy to set this case at a later point in time for a determination of more detailed restitution amounts.
Kommentar