More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Mari Fagel

GET UPDATES FROM Mari Fagel
 

Why Dr. Conrad Murray Should Have Shut the H*ll Up!

Posted: 11/30/11 06:29 PM ET

When even a judge uses the word "Yikes" to sum up Dr. Conrad Murray's participation in a documentary, then you know it was a dumb, dumb move. Just after Murray was found guilty of involuntary manslaughter, he appeared in the MSNBC documentary Michael Jackson and the Doctor: A Fatal Friendship. And at his sentencing, the words Murray uttered in that interview came back to bite him in the a**.

"I don't feel guilty because I did not do anything wrong."

Those eleven words pretty much sealed Murray's fate in Tuesday's sentencing. Throughout the six week trial, Murray never uttered a word, but the wise choice to keep him from taking the stand was all but erased when he granted MSNBC an exclusive interview. That interview gave the judge clear and direct evidence that Murray felt no remorse for his crime and took no personal responsibility for it. It also only further exacerbated the prosecution's portrayal of Murray as a man hungry for "money, fame and prestige." Three words the judge used to describe Murray in his sentencing Tuesday.

Adding insult to injury, Murray claimed in the interview that he felt betrayed by Michael Jackson, that HE felt taken advantage of by his patient. My response: Excuse me? The Judge's response: "Yikes."

With that one interview, the 35 letters the defense gave the judge from Murray's family, friends and patients attesting to his good character were all but meaningless. With that one interview, the judge had all the evidence he needed to prove that Murray deserved nothing short of the maximum sentence because he was still not remorseful for what he had done. Even the prosecutor in the case, Deputy District Attorney David Walgren, told the Today Show Wednesday that Murray should have never agreed to the interview.

Tonight, as Murray sits in his 5ft by 8ft cell, I'm betting he's punching himself for ever agreeing to that interview. What I can't understand is, was Murray so shortsighted as to think the judge would not watch the interview? Were his attorneys so stupid as to allow him to do the interview, or so absentminded as to not notice he had agreed to it? Any decent attorney knows better than to allow a client accused of a crime to grant a public interview with the media... well, any attorney besides Dr. Murray's... and any attorney besides Jerry Sandusky's.

Just weeks ago, Sandusky made the same shortsighted and ill-fated decision to grant an interview to the peacock network. While we'll have to wait and see what consequences Sandusky will face in court because of that interview, most viewers can agree that interview did not help his case to prove his innocence. If anything, it creeped out most viewers when he said, "I have horsed around with kids. I have showered after workouts. I have hugged them and I have touched their legs." Still, Sandusky pulled the same move as Murray and adamantly denied any wrongdoing and pledged his complete innocence. However, if Sandusky is indeed found to be guilty of 40 counts of sexual abuse, his words could also come back to haunt him.

So word to the wise, if you're on trial for a crime and the media comes knocking on your door, keep your mouth shut!

 

Follow Mari Fagel on Twitter: www.twitter.com/legaladytweets

 
 
  • Comments
  • 15
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Rita Pal
04:56 AM on 12/02/2011
Murray is a doctor. Most doctors tend to have an ego as large as a spaceship. This is the reason he participated in the documentary. He quite likes his fame and potential fortune. No doubt, after he has served his sentence, he will be back as a star of some kind.

Congratulations to the prosecution for bringing this case. In the UK, a case like this would have been shut down.
04:19 PM on 12/01/2011
Someone who takes the Hypocratic Oath makes you a doctor. Someone who disregards those words makes you a wreckless danger to society. From Day 1 (i.e., June 25, 2009) Murray has tried to portray himself as an innocent man who was trapped and betrayed by MJJ. If he were really concerned about his innocence he would have stayed off of Youtube and used the court as his venue. Everything that he did from that point on caused the neon sign of 'Guilty' hovering over his head to glow brighter and brighter and his own words and actions proved that verdict to be accurate. He chased the $ from the beginning and if he were really MJJ's 'friend', he would have said a simple 'No' to his request to be his personal physician. A true friend is like family and would have worked furiously to get MJJ the proper help and release his dependence on sleep aids. Murray gets no sympathy from me...ever (and he should consider himself lucky given the state of the CA penal system ... 4 years should be turned into 40 for what he did...he took a life)!
12:40 PM on 12/01/2011
Thank you for writing a clear and concise article that is not on the level of tabloid sensationalism and innuendo towards the victim.

Whether one subscribes to the biblical interpretation of "you reap what you sow," believes that "what goes around comes around," or fears karma. It's all the same, and the truth always comes out.
jhNY
Mercy.
12:07 PM on 12/01/2011
I have trouble with the judge's folding into the case, as if it were evidence presented at trial, a press interview. Obviously, the defendant was trying to rationalize his circumstance and sell himself as a victim that interview, hoping to gain sympathy from the public-- but it does not follow that the interview is a telling and accurate portrayal of the defendant's actual attitude toward his own doings, though it well might be.

But then again, there's a chance it is not, but rather, merely an attempt to ingratiate himself with the public, or at least that portion of the public which follows this case, who by the way, are no longer potential members of the jury pool.

The interview was not part of the case presented by either the prosecution or the defense, and was not subject to close examination by the lawyers during trial. I can't see why it could be cited by the judge when considering sentence length.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
LibelFreeZone
05:52 PM on 12/02/2011
Let me see if I have this straight: It follows. No, it doesn't follow. There's a chance. No, there's no chance. It might well be. No, it might not well be. It's a telling and accurate portrayal...except when it's not. Got it.
jhNY
Mercy.
07:41 PM on 12/02/2011
Nope.
12:03 PM on 12/01/2011
During the trial we saw evidence of total disregard for the safety of his patient, negligent abandonment, no professional integrity compounded with dishonesty. greed and a failure to acknowledge responsibility for his actions. These things, coupled a complete absence of regret, remorse or compassion for Jackson and his family, resulted in the Judge's vociferous condemnation of Murray and the maximum sentence being imposed.

Although the documentary was morally reprehensible and ill-advised, it was, in my opinion, the least of Murray's sins.
10:04 AM on 12/01/2011
What Murray said post-conviction had absolutely NO EFFECT on his sentencing at all. That was already signed, sealed and delivered by the judge after the verdict had been read. He TELEGRAPHED it. He not only praised the jury for its services ABOVE AND BEYOND but his language in denying Murray's release on his own recognizance pending sentencing as to the societal threat he posed in-between made it OBVIOUS right then and there that he personally felt that the man should be locked up and have the key thrown away. This was conveyed not only with his literal words but HOW he said it, with his tonality and emphasis. I don't care what the judge referenced at the actual sentencing, his mind was made up WELL AHEAD OF TIME. Murray would have received the same sentence regardless.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
MeinNH
Ooooo Silly Me
08:20 AM on 12/01/2011
When I saw the sentencing on TV it seemed to me that the judge really wanted to lock him up and throw away the key but had to go by the guidelines he was bound to. Conrad Murray had an insolent look on his face that someone needed to slap the hell off it.
07:02 AM on 12/03/2011
Agreed on all counts!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Marzipan29
11:17 PM on 11/30/2011
You're absolutely right. I used to have a little bit of sympathy for Murray even though I still cry about Michael. I was thinking that he is still a human being. But after what came out in the trial and later what came out of his own mouth in the documentary, I'm sooo mad at him. I'm mad because Michael would still be here if he at least called the ambulence in time. The hospital was 1.5 miles away :-( 4 minutes away. Michael didn't have to die, he could have been saved but this guy doesn't care, apparently. I'm satisfied that he got the maximum sentence but I can't believe that you can only get 4 years for what he had done. And he will not serve all of it, it will probably be less than 2 years. Where's the justice???? And maybe he wasn't alone in all of this. I really would love to find out.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
05:55 AM on 12/01/2011
He was already dead when the Dr. stopped talking to his girlfriends on the phone.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Marzipan29
05:27 PM on 12/05/2011
Yes, he was. I believe it. I meant that if Murray was watching MJ and saw that he stopped breathing he cold have saved him
09:49 PM on 11/30/2011
Right on Mari Fagel! Conrad Murry is a psychopath. Lynda Zussman
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
05:58 AM on 12/01/2011
psychopath |ˈsīkəˌpaTH|
noun
a person suffering from chronic mental disorder with abnormal or violent social behavior.
• informal an unstable and aggressive person: schoolyard psychopaths will gather around a fight to encourage the combatants.

He was a narcissist not a psychopath.

narcissism |ˈnärsəˌsizəm|
noun
• Psychology extreme selfishness, with a grandiose view of one's own talents and a craving for admiration, as characterizing a personality type.