Six man and six women have been chosen to hear the Jackson family's wrongful death lawsuit against concert promoter AEG Live, with three more jurors to be selected as alternates.
A jury has been chosen for Michael Jackson wrongful death trial following a month-long selection. On Monday, April 22, six men and six women were seated to hear the $40 billion civil lawsuit filed by the late King of Pop's mother and children against concert promoter AEG Live.
Three more jurors still have to be selected to serve as alternates in the trial, which will possibly begin with opening statements later this week or next week in a Los Angeles courtroom. Judge Yvette M. Palazuelos has previously reminded that the trial could last two or three months.
Michael's mother Katherine and his children Paris, Prince and Blanket sued AEG Live over the hiring of Dr. Conrad Murray who was convicted of involuntary manslaughter in the King of Pop's untimely death. They claimed the concert promoter negligently hired and supervised Murray when he served to care for MJ's health during the preparation of "This Is It" concert series.
Murray himself, through his attorney, asked an appellate court to throw out his conviction on Monday. The lawyer for MJ's former physician claimed that prosecutors had failed at trial to prove that the cardiologist was responsible for the pop icon's death, and contended that the trial judge, Michael Pastor, "displayed a bias" against the doctor.
"In more ways than one, Jackson was a desperate man," appellate attorney Valerie Wass wrote in a 231-page brief. "Based on his desperate financial state, combined with his physiological problems, Jackson may have acted recklessly and/or irrationally on June 25th by self-injecting."
Wass also wrote that the overwhelming media coverage during the trial could affect the jurors' decision in the high-profile case. "It appears that due to the publicity surrounding the case, and the fact the victim was one of the most famous people in the world, the court was trying to make an example out of appellant," she argued.