It will be tonight at 8pm et on the REELZ channel.

It will be a behind the scenes look at John's tragic, untimely death. I think they may either have new info or clarification because this show often does.

There's not been a new show about John Ritter in many years!

I'd like to watch this tonight but I don't get the Reelz channel. Maybe, somebody that does can do a recap ?

This is now available on Peacock. Very good show. It made is clear why Amy lost her case when she sued the hospital after John's death. The good news is John's brother Tom also had this hereditary defect in heart and was able to get it corrected as well. The doctor speculates that the father's death Tex was caused by the same defect/condition. The whole series has alot of excellent shows as well.

This is now available on Peacock. Very good show. It made is clear why Amy lost her case when she sued the hospital after John's death. The good news is John's brother Tom also had this hereditary defect in heart and was able to get it corrected as well. The doctor speculates that the father's death Tex was caused by the same defect/condition. The whole series has alot of excellent shows as well.

According to Henry Winkler (who saw John on the day that he died), every time that the doctors treated John as if he was having a heart attack, his aorta tear got wider and wider until it was no longer there.

According to Dr. Michael Hunter, when the doctors treated John with blood thinners (which are standard treatments for somebody having a heart attack as they allow for blood to flow more quickly through constricted arteries), the blood seeped quicker out of his artery. When somebody like John Ritter is experiencing an aortic dissection, blood leaks from a tear in its main artery. So giving John blood thinners in all likelihood, helped hasten his death.

The jurors in Amy Yasbeck's case however, concluded that the doctors who treated John acted in good faith. While they may have not identified John's acute aortic dissection immediately, that doesn't necessarily constitute that they were conducting medical negligence or malpractice.

Yes exactly the jury concluded they treated him in good faith based on the situation that was presented.