admin
THIS week’s jury verdict sent shock waves through Michael Jackson fans who were hoping to see concert promoter AEG Live held at least partially responsible for Michael Jackson’s death. Many expressed outrage at the verdict. At first blush, the jury verdict does seem odd.The jury was charged with answering 16 questions, in order, given to them on a jury verdict form. If they answered any one of the first few questions in the negative, then AEG Live would prevail and there would be no need to answer the remaining questions.
The jury unanimously answered the first question in favour of the Michael Jackson’s heirs.
AEG Live hired Dr Conrad Murray, the jury determined. This was a hotly disputed issue, with AEG Live arguing that Michael Jackson had hired the doctor himself. Michael Jackson’s legal team cleared that first hurdle.
Question two pertained to whether Dr Murray was “unfit or incompetent to perform the work for which he was hired.” Based on the criminal conviction and the fact that Dr Murray administered propofol to Michael Jackson in an unmonitored setting, contrary to medical and ethical guidelines for its use, it would seem that this question would have been an easy one for the jury to answer in the affirmative.
Instead, the jury voted 10-2 that Dr Murray was not “unfit or incompetent” when he was hired. After the trial, the jury foreman said that if the verdict form had used the word “ethical”, the vote may have been different. Instead, he said, the jury believed that because Dr Murray was licensed and graduated from an accredited college, he was not unfit or incompetent.
This takes a very narrow reading of the words “unfit or incompetent.” Being a properly educated and licensed doctor does not make one “fit”, at least in the minds of most people. Certainly, ethics can and should play a part in it.
So does this mean the jury got it wrong? Not so fast.
While the attention has been placed on that particular question because it was the one that triggered the verdict for AEG Live, the next few questions would have made a verdict in favour of Michael Jackson’s mother and children unlikely, based on how the jury viewed the evidence.
Even if Dr Murray had been found to be “unfit or incompetent”, the next questions addressed whether AEG Live knew or should have known about his unfitness and whether AEG Live’s conduct was a “substantial factor” in causing Michael Jackson’s death. Based on statements made to the media, it seems clear that the jury likely never would answered these questions in favour of Katherine Jackson and her grandchildren, even if they did answer the second question differently.
One of the jurors pointed out how Michael Jackson was used to getting his own way, and if Dr Murray had not done what he wanted, Jackson would have replaced him with another doctor who would have. Further, as AEG Live attorneys pointed out throughout trial, the company did not know the specifics of what was going on behind closed doors, between Jackson and Dr Murray. — forbes.com.
Online Reporter