Photo

Reuters Photojournalism

Our day's top images, in-depth photo essays and offbeat slices of life. See the best of Reuters photography.  See more | Photo caption 

Photo

Best of Cannes

Style and scenes from the Cannes Film Festival.  Slideshow 

Photo

Ethiopia's salt trails

For centuries merchants have traveled to Ethiopia to collect salt from the surface of the vast desert basin.  Slideshow 

Sponsored Links

Michael Jackson's convicted doctor wishes he testified: lawyers

Dr. Conrad Murray sits in court after he was sentenced to four years in county jail for his involuntary manslaughter conviction of pop star Michael Jackson in Los Angeles November 29, 2011. REUTERS/Mario Anzuoni

Dr. Conrad Murray sits in court after he was sentenced to four years in county jail for his involuntary manslaughter conviction of pop star Michael Jackson in Los Angeles November 29, 2011.

Credit: Reuters/Mario Anzuoni

LOS ANGELES | Tue Jun 26, 2012 3:37am EDT

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - The physician convicted of killing Michael Jackson regrets not testifying on his own behalf while on trial last year, two defense lawyers said on Monday after visiting the jailed doctor on the third anniversary of the pop star's death.

Dr. Conrad Murray, hired as the "Thriller" singer's personal physician in 2009, began serving a four-year jail term in November after a jury found him guilty of involuntary manslaughter.

Prosecutors argued during the six-week trial that Murray was grossly negligent in administering the surgical anesthetic propofol as a sleep aid to Jackson and that the doctor failed to properly monitor Jackson on the drug.

They also presented evidence that Murray delayed in calling for emergency assistance when the singer stopped breathing the night of his death and that the doctor failed to tell arriving medical personnel he had given the performer propofol.

Defense lawyers say Murray gave Jackson a small dose of propofol to help him sleep. But they argued the singer was dependent on the drug and likely gave himself an extra, fatal dose - and swallowed a handful of sedatives - without Murray knowing.

Two of his lawyers visited Murray on Monday at the Los Angeles County jail where he is incarcerated. Attorney J. Michael Flanagan said the doctor was "adapting fairly well for a person who is serving time and who is actually innocent".

Jackson was found lifeless at his Los Angeles mansion on June 25, 2009, about three weeks before he was due to begin a series of concerts in London aimed at returning him to the limelight after the humiliation of his 2005 trial and acquittal on child molestation allegations.

Murray's attorneys denied he was guilty of criminal negligence. But the physician himself never took the witness stand in his own defense, a decision he has come to regret, according to his appellate lawyer, Valerie Wass, and Flanagan, the co-counsel for his manslaughter trial.

Flanagan told Reuters that Murray's lead trial attorney, Ed Chernoff, was adamant that Murray not take the stand. Flanagan said he strongly disagreed with Chernoff, but Murray ultimately followed Chernoff's advice and declined to testify.

"Murray now realizes that he should have testified," Flanagan said, adding that there were various nuances in the case that Murray alone, as the only person who was with Jackson in the last hours of his life, could adequately explain to the jury.

"Now he says that the biggest mistake he made in the trial of the case was not testifying," Flanagan said. "We had so many gaps in the case that needed to be filled, that could only be supplied by Dr. Murray."

If the verdict were to be reversed on grounds of an error of law by the court or over an issue of admissibility of evidence or flawed jury instructions, leading to a retrial, the defense would then seek to put Murray on the stand, Flanagan said.

Wass, who is working on an appeal for Murray, suggested that jurors might have been influenced by information they inadvertently saw about the case through social media that they were allowed access to during the trial.

"I think during the trial, it would have been difficult not to go on Twitter and see anything (about the case)," she said. Flanagan said it would have been better to sequester the jury due to the extremely high profile of the trial.

He said he expected that Murray would end up serving no more than two years of his term, and could find himself released before his appeal ran its course, under guidelines that allow for reduced time for good behavior.

(Editing by Alessandra Rizzo)

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
Comments (3)
TheresaM wrote:
So, Conrad Murray wishes that he would have testified on his own behalf at his trial? Instead, he made his testimony in the form of a documentary that was shown the week of the verdict. In the documentary, Murray was freely able to “tell” his side of the story without risk of cross examination. I wish he would have testified as the ADA Walgren would have ripped that testimony to shreds. That documentary was probably one of the reasons that the judge gave him the full sentence allowed by the law. Murray was utterly unconvincing and lacking in remorse in that documentary.

Murray continues to maintain his innocence. Of which actions was he innocent? Failure to call 911 when his patient could have been saved had they arrived in time. Neglecting to mention the medications that he gave his patient to emergency responders including the emergency room doctors. Leaving the room to make phone calls while giving his patient a drug which requires constant monitoring. Failure to have the necessary monitoring equipment in the room. Hiding evidence at the scene of his crime. Or, the story line about giving Jackson only a small amount of propofol. The evidence presented at the trial completely contradicts this including the autopsy and toxicology reports. Murray hooked up Jackson to a propofol drip and failed to properly monitor his patient. This was brilliantly proven by the testimony of Dr. Shafer, the man who wrote the instructions for the administration of propofol used by hospital personnel.

Murray’s financial situation and the true occupation of his myriad girlfriend’s were not admissible at trial. Social media could have influenced this part of the trial but I think the actions of the girlfriend who testified in court already gave the jury a pretty good idea of her character. It sure didn’t help Murray.

Murray egregiously violated 17 standards of care in the treatment of his patient resulting in the homicide death of his patient. There is nothing innocent about that and he deserves to be exactly where he is. As far as an appeal, I hope he goes before the new LA County judge, Judge David Walgren.

As for Reuters as a mouthpiece for this whining jail inmate, their timing of this article during the 3rd anniversary of Murray’s patient’s death is, while not unexpected, completing insensitive and appalling.

Jun 26, 2012 8:59am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Murray’s lawyers decided their client should not testify because there was too much chance he’s slip up and come up with yet another account of what happened. The evidence against him for negligent homicide was overwhelming. Now they all want to whine, and Reuters is helping them.

Murray should get extra time for complaining so much about the little bit he has to do. Be nice if his lawyers got thrown in with him too.

Jun 26, 2012 11:14am EDT  --  Report as abuse
PenDragon57 wrote:
Attorney J. Michael Flanagan said the doctor was “adapting fairly well for a person who is serving time and who is actually innocent”.

Please tell me how administering anesthetic as a cure for insomnia, in a domestic setting, without proper monitoring and resuscitation equipment, abandoning his patient, delaying to call 911, hiding evidence, failing to give crucial information to paramedics and lying to Police – how does that make him “actually innocent”? None of the above was ever disputed by Murray or his lawyers. Neither has he shown any remorse of the fact that his patient died following his negligent and unethical behavior.

It seems to me Murray is reveling in his new found “celebrity” status. He continues to be given a voice by the media, as he whinges about prison life and his documentary is still being aired by unscrupulous broadcasters. No doubt he will be writing a book and starring in his own bio-pic when he is released – who says crime doesn’t pay?!

Jun 27, 2012 10:18am EDT  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.