The N.J. Supreme Court released its opinion in State v O’Driscoll today. Its a very narrow holding based on the facts of the case that the mistake of an officer in reading the old refusal form statiung 6 months mandfatory suspenion instead of the current 7 months, is not “material” . It did not reach the larger issue that the case was cited for ie the interlock discrepancy or the present refusal form. However it as much as the court announces the standard of materiality, these issues are left for another day
by Jeffrey Evan Gold
Michael Jackson role as the Scarecrow in the filmed version of The Wiz was sort of prophetic really. How truly internally weak and made of his own creation was this King of Pop, continually in need of more straw and being propped up by others.
This week the civil suit by Michael Jackson’s kids against AEG, the promotors of the “This Is It” tour heated up with the promoters putting on the stand Debbie Rowe, MJs ex and mothers to his 2 kids. The point was to show MJ used propathol as far back as the 90s. The lawsuit’s cause of action is that the concert promotors were negligent in hiring Dr Murray and so were in effect complicit in his prescription of propathol, an anesthetic MJ was using to sleep.
The testimony of Rowe was interesting in a celeb way for many MJ fans letting them into the private world of MJ. But it would seem to have been also pretty devastating for the kids suit because it showed Michael’s propensity for the drug long before Dr. Murray. Or was it?
Yes, AEG showed exactly its point, MJ was addicted to the drug long before. On the other hand, many of these promoters were on hand back then. They may very well have known this odd propensity for the almost coma inducing anesthetic propathol.
So when these promoters put up bundles of cash and time and effort to capitalize on MJ one last time, didn’t they know exactly why they were paying Dr Murray $150,000 a month? The legal questions may be did they specifically know what the Dr would do? Are they liable when they hire a licensed MD to do his job? Could they foresee that he old disregard all medical ethics for his paycheck?
This is a negligence case, the issue is whether the promoters had a duty of care to MJ, broke that duty, which caused his death. The burden is on the kids to show these elements but by a preponderance of the evidence
We will know what a jury says soon. This is the defense case we are in now. Dr Murray was been convicted criminally long ago. This civil case is just about money. Yet, there really is something sinister about these promoters in my opinion who would hire a Dr to do whatever was needed to prop up their investment.
Seems to me that all these close past associates of MJ really cared about was their capital investment in a man part golden calf, part scarecrow. I imagine them wicked witches in this story …all that is needed is to outfit Michael’s monkey with wings. More straw Dr Murray! Do what you need to do Mr Murray! You must “take care” of our investment Dr Murray! Hahahaha!
Ok, so I’ve gone over the top to make my literary point. But my own opinion is that they knew all the MJ lore much better than most. They after all knew Michael very well indeed. That’s why i think they hired the Dr. They knew he could never get through the tour without medical help, without someone propping him up, putting more and more straw in the scarecrow, doing whatever it took to get a return on their capital investment, with a blind eye to the risks to their golden idol.
By Jeffrey Evan Gold
“Court TV” as it had become “In Session” on TruTV died March 1, leaving only a shell of itself as a two hour highlight show. But a funny thing happened on the way to that death, the murder case of a sex-enthused, petite, ninja named Jodi Arias.
I started the coverage of that trial for HLN with Mike Galanos. We started just with her testimony. First, we were doing just two days, then three, then four, and then it just didn’t stop. We did it live, but the hard break commercials caused an uproar and the “pause button” was instituted. Then the trial would last all day and night and every HLN show covered “as if” live. A non stop HLN and Jodi Arias marriage of convenience.
The ratings were thru the roof and HLN went from #4 to #2 in cable news for the trial. Lesson learned. New shows like “After Dark” were added to the now HLN all legal all the time lineup, and many of In Session’s team were now HLN staples.
After Arias, ratings slipped back, but Zimmerman boosted them again proving legal coverages worth to HLN. In fact CNN, HLNs big sister (remember when HLN was CNN Headline news?) got into act big time. Not to be out done, CNN really pushed on live Zimmerman coverage. No pause button for CNN, which covered the trial as a live news event. And many viewers switched off HLNs pause button to CNN to watch live as it happened.
The die was cast. Legal is in at Turner (which owns CNN, HLN, and TruTV.) But now what? There are only so many really national media cases, and they are not all televised … and cameras in court is what makes court TV. Not every case is going to get Arias ratings. That case had sex and lots of it. Sort of a Days of Our Lives for some.
Big cases like Whitey Bulgar in Boston, with 19 murders, gets very little reaction from HLN and the Arias crowd. It’s a mob case of wise guys with the center being a 83 yr old defendant. The Ft Hood killer, Maj. Hassan slaughtered 13, the worst murder on a US military base ever.
But what has? Casey Anthony was acquitted of killing her toddler. Jodi Arias killed her ex boyfriend. George Zimmerman killed a 17 yr old boy. Andrea Sneiderman is alleged to have lied about her affair to cover a murder of her husband. And Joshua Young was acquitted yesterday of killing his step brother. These are the court days of our media lives. Not that they are trivial, murder never is. But as we pick and choose cases to highlight, we must be mindful that news coverage can shape minds.
As a legal analyst of course I think court coverage is great. I’m just wondering where we go with it if we start looking at it as only entertainment. Super reality TV for sure, but we should be careful to keep it as news not just entertainment. We need to keep perspective that our justice system has a real purpose and that we chance devaluing it if we make it into a reality soap opera.
Jodi Arias is a bad bad girl, but the hue and cry over a jury that could not agree to kill her was out of line with who gets death usually, mass murderers, cop killers, kid killers, killers with long records. Most ex girlfriends just don’t. Zimmerman was a cop wannabe following a back kid, who beat him up and got killed in process. But would the case have been the same if the victim was a 40 year old, instead of a kid?
There are many more cases that are not about boyfriends, sex, kids, toddlers, etc. but do they appeal to the daytime viewer? Are we only going to see cases that evoke the viscera of daytime viewers who are frankly mostly women.
As entertainment, we give them want they want. But as citizens we have wonder whether we start skewing our legal system because of it. Do we kill Jodi Arias because her case has been so hyped? Do we prosecute Zimmerman for a civil rights violation because the media hype over case stirred mass protests over the verdict?
And why really are we even watching Andrea Sneiderman live when her murder charges were dropped and all that’s left is her lying about affairs, while mass murderers like Bulger and Hassan are mere 30 sec news updates?
I have grown up in courts. It’s my world. Our court system with all its faults is the best in the world. It is one of our defining aspects as Americans. I cherish it in fact. But It cannot become either a blood sport or a soap opera. I am a 100% supporter of cameras in court and welcome more news coverage.
Court TV is dead, long live court TV! As long as we keep perspective. Lady Justice wears a blindfold so that prejudice will not intrude, including about the ratings.