Conrad Murray Trial - Verdict: GUILTY

[00:00:00] Speaker 1: They don't have to prove their case is more likely, their scenario is more likely. The judges and the bench, we're going to shut up. [00:00:20] Speaker 2: Face the flag of the United States of America, recognizing the principles for which it stands. Depart 107 of Los Angeles Superior Court, State of California, is now in session. The Honorable Michael Lee, Pastor, Judge Presiding. Please be seated. [00:00:36] Speaker 1: This is the case of People v. Conrad Robert Murray, Case SA-073-164. Dr. Murray is present in court with counsel. Mr. Chernoff, Mr. Flanagan, Mr. Gorgian. The people by counsel, Mr. Walgren and Ms. Brazil, all alternates are present. All regular members of the jury are present. To everybody, good afternoon. [00:00:56] Speaker ?: Good afternoon. [00:00:57] Speaker 1: Ladies and gentlemen, the jury, I am advised that the jury has reached a verdict. Who is the foreperson of the jury? [00:01:04] Speaker ?: I am your honor. [00:01:05] Speaker 1: Jury number three? Thank you, sir. Is that, in fact, correct? Yes, it is. The jury has reached a verdict? Yes, sir. Has the jury, through the foreperson, signed the appropriate verdict form? Yes, sir. Do you have all the verdict forms with you? Yes. Could you provide the verdict forms to Deputy Jones, who will then present them to me? The court has reviewed the verdict form, and ladies and gentlemen, there was a typo in terms of the date of the alleged incident. And it was written June 9th, 2009. And juror number three, you've corrected that to June 25th. You put a 2-5, and you put some squigglies after that? [00:01:58] Speaker 3: Yes, sir. [00:01:59] Speaker 1: All right, thank you. I reviewed the verdict form, which now I will pass to Mrs. Benson, the court clerk. Mrs. Benson will publish the verdict. [00:02:08] Speaker ?: Thank you. [00:02:16] Speaker 4: Superior Court of California, Los Angeles County. The people of the state of California plaintiff v. Conrad Robert Murray, defendant. Case number S-A-073-164. Title of court and cause. We, the jury and the above entitled action, find the defendant, Conrad Robert Murray, guilty of the crime of involuntary manslaughter. In violation of penal code section 192, subsection B. Alleged victim, Michael Joseph Jackson. Alleged date of June 25th, 2009. As charged in count one of the information. This seventh day of November, 2011. Four-person juror ID number 145, seat number three. Is this your verdict? Is this your individual and personal verdict? So say you one, so say you all. [00:03:16] Speaker 1: Ladies and gentlemen, I'm going to ask you whether this is your individual and personal verdict. I'm going to be asking you individually if this is correct. If it is your individual and personal verdict, say yes. If it is not your individual and personal verdict, say no. Is this your individual and personal verdict, juror one? Yes, sir. Juror two? Yes, sir. Juror three? Yes. Juror four? Yes, sir. Juror five? Yes. Juror six? Yes. Juror seven? Yes. Juror eight? Yes. Juror nine? Yes. Juror ten? [00:03:56] Speaker 3: Yes, sir. [00:03:58] Speaker 1: Juror number 11? [00:03:59] Speaker 3: Yes. [00:03:59] Speaker 1: Juror 12? [00:04:00] Speaker 4: Yes, sir. [00:04:01] Speaker 1: All jurors having indicated in the affirmative, the court clerk is directed to record the verdict. Do counsel waive further reading of the verdict as recorded? Mr. Walgren? [00:04:11] Speaker 5: Yes, your honor. [00:04:12] Speaker 1: Mr. Chernoff? Yes. Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, I now will read to you final instructions upon discharge of jurors. You now have completed your jury service on this case. On behalf of all of the employees of the Los Angeles Superior Court and the parties in this case, and others involved in this case, please accept my thanks for your time and effort. Throughout this trial, I have admonished each of you not to discuss anything about this case with anyone other than a fellow juror during deliberations in the jury room. That order is lifted and vacated, which means that from now on, you have the absolute right either to discuss or not to discuss anything about this case with anyone else. If you want to talk about this case, if you want to talk about this case, if you do not want to talk about this case, the decision is appropriate. The decision is yours and yours alone. I remind you that under California law, you must wait at least 90 days before negotiating or agreeing to accept any payment or benefit in exchange for providing any information about the case. Let me advise you of some rules the law puts in place for your convenience and protection. The lawyers in this case, the defendant or their representatives, now may talk to you about the case, including your deliberations or verdict. Those discussions must occur at a reasonable time and place and only with your consent. Please immediately report to the court any unreasonable contact made without your consent by the lawyers in this case, the defendant or their representatives. A lawyer, defendant or representative who violates these rules, violates a court order and may be fined. I hereby order that the court's record of personal juror identifying information, including names, addresses and telephone numbers, be sealed until further order of this court. If in the future, the court is asked to decide whether this information will be released, notice will be sent to any juror whose information is involved. You may oppose the release of this information and ask that any hearing on the release be closed to the public. The court will decide whether and under what conditions any information may be disclosed. I do order that the confidential emergency contact information forms you completed and provided to the court staff be destroyed. On a personal note, I remember way back when, in early September, when first we met, I advised you at that time that you were being asked, as all jurors are asked, to accept the responsibility of citizenship in this great country to accept the responsibility of citizenship in this great country. And I told you I understood that serving on a case would be a hardship, an inconvenience and burden on you because you have your own lives outside of this courtroom. You have responsibilities to your job, to your profession, and to your families. You have undertaken the responsibility of jury duty in a remarkable fashion, as do jurors every day throughout this great country. You have made sacrifices and you certainly have had to endure burdens and impositions, delays, and a case that ran over what I told you you would have to serve. Throughout this trial, you have been remarkable in terms of your patience, in terms of your conscientiousness, and your dedication. You have never been late, you've been here, and you've had a wonderful disposition, you always have been respectful to those of us in the courtroom, and we're genuinely appreciative of it. I certainly know and appreciate that serving on a case of this sort has interfered with your everyday lives, but you undertook the responsibility in good faith. And I again want to indicate, on behalf of our courtroom family in Department 107, as well as those involved in the case, thank you for your time and your efforts. I want to single out the alternates in this case, if you recall when we met the first time, I told you that the only way to analogize the role of an alternate is a spare tire. Most of the time you never need the spare, but when you do need it, you really need it. We didn't need spares in this case because the regular jurors were so conscientious, but the five alternates also were remarkably dedicated and conscientious, and I want to thank you as well for performing your civic duty. I'm going to ask that you accommodate us a little bit more by going back into the jury room and just relaxing for a few minutes. I and some of our court staff members want to go in and thank you individually for your sacrifices. So once again, ladies and gentlemen, on behalf of all those involved in the case, thank you for being jurors in this case, and again, I want to wish you the very best. We stand for jurors in this courtroom and it's not standing for them in terms of tolerating them. We actually stand up for jurors and people want to know why we do that. Well, we do it because we respect you and because we appreciate you. And that's why at every session in this case, we have stood for jurors and why now again, those of us will stand for you as well. My best wishes, you are discharged and excused. Jurors have left the courtroom. Thank you. All right, with regard to further proceedings in this case, Mr. Chernoff, would you like to be heard? [00:10:39] Speaker 3: Judge, you're asking about about sentencing. [00:10:42] Speaker 1: Any motion and probation and sentencing, Dr. Murray has a statutory right to speedy sentencing within 20 court days after today's date, which means on or before December 8th, 2011. I do not believe we have a probation report. We may, but I haven't reviewed any documentation and I don't think we do. So it's up to you. [00:11:03] Speaker 3: We were discussing the sentencing, possible sentencing dates and we were talking about three weeks. [00:11:12] Speaker 1: If you have a date that you're suggesting, let me know so then I can turn to the people. [00:11:17] Speaker 3: Give me a second, Judge. Please. [00:11:48] Speaker 1: Defense counsel are conferring. [00:11:49] Speaker 3: You're on November 22nd, is that whole, 21st, that whole week is not dark, is it? [00:12:19] Speaker 1: Uh, we are open on the 21st and the 22nd. We are not in session the remainder of the week. What about the 22nd? [00:12:28] Speaker 3: Is that something that you can do? Is that sufficient? [00:12:30] Speaker 1: I can. [00:12:31] Speaker ?: Thank you. [00:12:32] Speaker 3: Is that sufficient time for a probation report? That's very good on the week of the 28th, if that's possible, Your Honor. What's, what is the schedule of probation on that? [00:12:42] Speaker 1: Two to three weeks. Two to three weeks. It's very difficult to get a report within a two week time frame. My suggestion is that it be the week thereafter. The problem I have is I'm starting a major case on the 29th. Uh, if it means I have to go to the 30th, I'll do that. If I start on the 29th, I can adjust the case. [00:13:14] Speaker 3: Uh, Judge, I'm sorry, you said you're starting on the 29th case? Is that what you're doing? [00:13:21] Speaker 1: I was. I can do probation and sentencing on this case on the 29th as 13 of 20 if you want me to. [00:13:28] Speaker 3: Yes, Judge, but we've, that will fit everyone's schedule and, and Mr. Walgren, I believe is, seems to be okay with that, so. [00:13:35] Speaker 1: Let me just ask before we go to the next step. Is, uh, Tuesday the 29th of November acceptable for the people? [00:13:40] Speaker 5: It is, Your Honor. [00:13:41] Speaker 1: Thank you. With regard to, uh, further proceedings in this case, uh, and Dr. Murray's status, do you want to be heard on that, Mr. Walgren? [00:13:50] Speaker 5: I would, Your Honor. [00:13:51] Speaker 1: You may. [00:13:53] Speaker 5: At this time, Your Honor, the people would ask that the defendant be remanded into custody. Uh, he has, as the court is well aware, has had over approximately two and a half years to prepare for today's date. Uh, he's now a convicted felon, um, and has been, uh, deemed, uh, the causative factor of Michael Jackson's death. At this time, we would ask that he be remanded, uh, with no bail, uh, pending sentencing on November 29th, 2011. Thank you. [00:14:21] Speaker 3: Thank you, Mr. Walgren. Mr. Chernoff, I'll hear from you. All the causative factors for remand are not, uh, do not apply in this case. For 18 months, Dr. Murray has been on bail, has not violated any of the rules of the court, has not been a flight risk, has not been a danger to the community. If he continues that way, he has family obligations that he has to take care of. I, the, the fact that this was a possibility doesn't mean that those obligations don't need to be taken care of. There's no reason to remand him under the circumstances. And we ask that you release him, um, OR until sentencing date of 29th of September, uh, November. [00:15:01] Speaker 1: Is the matter submitted, Mr. Chernoff? It is. Mr. Walgren? [00:15:04] Speaker 5: Yes, Your Honor. Thank you. [00:15:05] Speaker 1: The court, uh, takes into account the factors, uh, in penal code sections 1166 and, uh, 1272. Uh, throughout this, uh, trial, Dr. Murray was presumed innocent. And certainly there is a constitutional guarantee of bail to pre-conviction status. Uh, Dr. Murray has been convicted of a jury, uh, of a felony by the jury. Uh, the jurors found beyond a reasonable doubt, unanimously, that Dr. Murray, uh, is in fact guilty of the crime of involuntary, uh, manslaughter. There is not, no statutory right to bail based upon this, uh, felony conviction. The court, uh, does evaluate the defense request for continued release on OR and bail pursuant to the provisions of the penal code sections, uh, to which I referred. Uh, the defendant shall be committed to the proper custody of the county to await judgment of the court upon the general verdict unless, upon considering certain factors, the evidence supports a decision to allow Dr. Murray to remain out of custody on bond. The first factor is the protection of the public. Quite frankly, I feel that that is a significant and demonstrable factor in this case. And public protection, uh, as far as I'm concerned, dictates that the defendant be remanded without bail. Uh, in view of the fact that Dr. Murray has been convicted of a crime involving homicide. This is not a crime involving, uh, mistake of judgment. This is not a crime involving, uh, administration of drugs per se. This is a crime where the end result was the death of a human being. That factor, uh, demonstrates rather dramatically that the, uh, public should be protected. Secondly, the seriousness of the offense charged and proven. The offense charged and proven in this case is a homicide. Uh, and, uh, the homicide is predicated upon criminal negligence in this case. As far as I'm concerned, that factor is a significant factor in terms of, uh, uh, remand. Third, the previous criminal record of the defendant. As far as I know, that, uh, uh, uh, criminal record is non-existent. And that is a factor which would, uh, indicate to the court that Dr. Murray should, uh, remain on his posted bond. The fourth factor is the probability of the defendant failing to appear for the judgment of the court upon the verdict. Dr. Murray has made all of his, uh, court appearance, his appearances. Uh, he has been represented by counsel. Uh, he has, uh, made appearances in the past. Uh, quite frankly, I don't know if Dr. Murray would, in fact, make those appearances in the future since he now is a convicted felon. And, uh, Dr. Murray, uh, has significant ties outside of the state of California. So, I genuinely am not sure about this factor. Uh, and, uh, the fifth factor is once again an overriding consideration, and that is public safety. Uh, Dr. Murray's reckless conduct in this case poses a demonstrable, uh, risk to the safety of the public. If Dr. Murray remains out of custody on bond, and even though Dr. Murray is a medical doctor, and even though he has been practicing public safety demands that he be remanded. Based upon my evaluation of all of these factors, I conclude that remand is appropriate. Dr. Murray is remanded to the custody of the Los Angeles Sheriff with no bail. And in the interim, he is to be kept in the care and custody of the Sheriff and ordered to appear for further proceedings and formal probation and sentencing on 29 November 2011 at 8:30 a.m. in this department. I expect that the people will have specific restitution. Restitution, we can wait a few moments, specific restitution related issues in this case, uh, pursuant to the provisions of Penal Code Section 1202.4 and, uh, be prepared to address any matters of restitution. Certainly, counsel are aware of the Realignment Act and the provisions of Penal Code Section 1170, Subdivision H. I do want sentencing memoranda filed by the people and by the defense in this case. Is there anything else, anything else to address at this juncture, Mr. Walgan? [00:19:39] Speaker 3: No, thank you, Your Honor. [00:19:39] Speaker 1: Mr. Chernoff? No, Judge. Thank you. Uh, for, uh, purposes of these proceedings, Dr. Murray is remanded. And, uh, the court is going to, uh, take a few moments to talk with the jurors, and members of the court staff will be talking to jurors as well. We are in recess. We are adjourned. [00:19:54] Speaker 5: Judge, any other outstanding orders regarding media contact? Are those still in effect? [00:20:00] Speaker 1: No. Thank you. Mr. Walgan, uh, asked a question about outstanding, uh, orders of the court regarding contact with the media or with anybody else. Those, uh, those orders are vacated. Good morning, Your Honor. [00:20:21] Speaker 3: On, uh, November 16th. Can I appear 977 for Dr. White? [00:20:25] Speaker 1: No. Between now and then, if the court wants to adjust its scheduling, it will. But, uh, this is a special proceeding involving Dr. White, just as it's a special proceeding involving Mr. Alford. Their appearance is necessary at this point, unless we go to the next step. Okay? Thank you. I'm gonna excuse myself, uh, and we can, uh, uh,