Dr.Conrad’s case is one of the high profile cases. He was a physician to one of the famous pop stars which existed: Michael Jackson. This report provides information on the crime committed and how computers were used in committing the crime. His case, however, wasn’t determined fully by computers. But at least with the available medical proof, he has direct links in this case. It’s a forensic study. It’s a branch of science that deals with the investigation of material found in digital devices. It deals with computer crime.
The physician was arrested on a Monday and was held without any bail. According to the judge, this crime had led to the death of a human being. All human beings, in this case, the public should be protected. Murray is portrayed as a reckless doctor who gave the pop star a sedative that led to reduced level of consciousness that led to the loss of memory. This propofol proved fatal as the pop star couldn’t breathe(“Propofol” 25). He is further charged with abandonment after constantly leaving Jackson’s bedside to go and check emails and make phone calls a move which is unethical in this field. In this case computers or machines that could be used to save Jackson’s life were not used according to the judge. This risked the life of the pop star. A doctor should be able to know the right instruments and equipment to be used especially in such sensitive circumstances. In one way computers contributed to the death of the pop star since they acted as the distractor to the doctor who is supposed to take care of the sick person.
Forensic findings indicated that the pop star’s death is as a result of propofol intoxication. The case was determined as homicide and Jackson’s personal doctor was charged with manslaughter. It was an accidental death that the doctor could have avoided(Ruder et al. 80-84). Though the doctor argues that it was involuntary, it was an accident that led to the loss of life and therefore was found guilty.
“Propofol.” Reactions Weekly&NA;.1376 (2011): 25. Web.
Ruder, Thomas D. et al. “Science Into Practice: Post-Mortem Imaging Provides Conclusive Evidence In A Non-Suspicious Death.” Journal of Forensic Radiology and Imaging 2.2 (2014): 80-84. Web.