Home Celebrity Michael Jackson: Defense Lawyer Mesereau Says Juries Don’t Like to Convict Doctors

Michael Jackson‘s accused killer, Dr. Conrad Murray, may not be convicted so easily.

That’s what Jackson’s former defense lawyer, Thomas Mesereau, suggests in an interview that’s buried in a new book.

The interview is with, of all people, Judge Larry Seidlin, the “crying judge” who made a fool of himself when he presided over the Anna Nicole Smith inquest in Florida. Not satisfied with his two minutes of fame, Seidlin has “published” a “book” called “The Killing of Anna Nicole Smith.”

I’ll skip Seidlin’s sad efforts to get Mesereau to praise him. Certainly, Mesereau slyly ignores Seidlin’s request for compliments. But what Mesereau, a top notch criminal defense lawyer, does say might be of interest. It’s particularly noteworthy since he liked Michael Jackson a lot, and fought hard for his acquittal in 2005.

Mesereau says: “I think that any prosecutor is going to be a little hesitant to go after someone who appears to be just the delivery person” —  in regard to Anna Nicole’s situation. But then he continues:  “You know, any crime requires a certain mental state, a certain form of intent. In law school, you learn about the general intent and specific intent but regardless of what term you use, it does require one to have a criminal state of mind to be guilty of almost any crime.”

There’s a lot more along this line, but Mesereau then answers a question by bringing in the Elvis Presley case–and this is relevant to Dr. Murray as it is to Dr. Christine Ehrosevich, who was Anna Nicole Smith’s doctor.

“Remember, the physician who was prescribing Elvis Presley inordinate amounts of medication was charged with manslaughter and acquitted years ago. So juries, in my opinion, don’t like to convict doctors unless there’s a tremendous pattern of abuse and criminal conduct.”

Mesereau continues, speaking in general circumstances: “Now if the doctor committed malpractice, maybe that belongs in a civil trial, maybe it belongs in an administrative hearing on his license. But I think a lot of people are reluctant to bring it to [the] level of a crime.”

Jackson fans are very emotional about Dr. Murray. But things when you get into a courtroom. Mesereau’s thoughts on this subject cannot be overlooked. I’m sure Dr. Murray’s lawyers are paying close attention to them.

18 replies to this post
  1. Took me time to study every of the feedback, but i really loved the article. It proved to be extremely useful to me and i\’m confident to all of the commenters here! it’s all the time better when you can not solely be informed, but additionally entertained! i’m confident you had enjoyable penning this article.

  2. In court cases, guilt is ascertained by degrees of certainty that the accused has in fact committed the crime. To put this simply, a jury or judge must determine whether a defendant is guilty by weighting the evidence brought against her or him. This is called “preponderance of evidence,” or the burden of proof. It’s the obligation of the plaintiff or prosecutor (the accusing party) to prove that the defendant (the accused party) is incorporated in the wrong.

  3. Roger, you know damn well Anna Nicole, Elvis Presley and Michael Jackson are different cases. Doctors gave Elvis and Anna pills they took them. Murray a cardiologist given Michael Jackson a drug he was trained to give him outside of a hospital setting and without the proper equipment. I think all of those donuts are producing to much fat around your brain.

  4. For awhile,I was concerned Star Trek was a dying franchise. Then JJ Abrams came along. Nice touch. The scene with kid Kirk was too quirky in the film, even if it was hot in the movie trailer. Star Trek XI breathed new life into this much loved Roddenberry world. I’d like to see all of this Enterprise cast return for additional outings. I was raised with the primary series. Heck, my pops got us a color Television just so we could view Star Trek each and every Friday evening. Currently, I’m stuck on these new characters. In MHO, they have breathed life to their characters and made them their very own. I, personally, am eager for more.

  5. Tom Mesereau is spot on. The case of The People v Conrad Murray is in no way a “slam dunk.” Unless the Los Angeles District Attorneys Office – an office notorious for information leaks – has some sort of bombshell-like evidence to introduce at trial that has not yet managed to be leaked, it is going to be incredibly hard to win a conviction based on the Law.

    ======

    PS TO MARIA MJ: The short answer to your question is yes. The Law gives licensed medical professionals a wide latitude (in practice and calling) – especially when it comes to criminal culpability.

    Be well.

  6. conrad murray killed Michael Jackson ! If they let free that killer, they have no excuse.
    In medical records, there are not twin cases. So the killer must pay for his murder.
    conrad murray killed michael !!!
    With all respects for Mr Mesereau, but the crime must be payed

  7. I think U.S. government officials are afraid of Dr. Conrad Murray and
    any of the other people who may have committed “homicide” against Michael Jackson.So, we the people must teach them how to be brave when fighting Evil.

  8. Thank you for the enlightening article. It’s always good to have Mr.Mesereau’s valuable intake on the case.
    I am surprized though at the mentality of the law. Being a doctor, does that automatically create a shield of good intentions around you? Even when you decide to give in to malpractice as a consequence of greed?
    Doctors are human beings in a particularly powerful position. Long term practice should not exclude them from falling to a criminal state of mind, if there is sufficient and beyond reasonable doubt evidence about that.
    Thank you.
    Maria MJ
    @VPB_MARIA

  9. Tom Messereau did not mention Murray’s case at all. Roger Freidman is the one making the comparison so he can write yet another article about Michael leading to more visits to his website

  10. With all due respect for Mr. Mesereau’s opinion, Elvis’ MD prescribed, Dr. Erosovich in the ANS Smith prescribed; in both those cases the victim imbibed the pills of their own volition; with respect to Dr. Murray, he pumped a lethal amount of a dangerous drug through an intervenous tube into Michael Jackson after previously infushing MJ with sleeping and anti-anxiety medication. In fact, MJ was probably already asleep when the propofol entered his bloodstream. Just a bit of a difference, don’t you think?

  11. Roger, suggestion for the website: Ask Roger! Once a week you will open up questions from your readers. Like I have two already for you because of something I saw on TV:
    1) How could Ray Charles NOT leave his estate to his children? And how is it that the children cannot contest his estate?

    2) Who owns the publishing rights to El Debarge’s songs? Him or Gordy.

    Thanks.

  12. A jury convicted Dr. Kevorkian, and his “patients” wanted to die. If the DA does his job, a jury will convict Conrad Murray.

  13. The Key difference in Murray’s case is that he didn’t just prescribe medication to Michael Jackson, he administered the very drug that ended up killing him. Unlike Elvis, Marilyn, Anna Nicole, Jackson’s was ruled a homicide.

Leave a Reply

Print This Post Print This Post