October 1st thru.....

[Spectorfan8]

Is that a real legit site, I just clicked onto that link for that Shuman woman??:confused: Not questioning anyone here but that site.

JMO

I am pretty sure it is. You Yahoo her or Google her. A lot of stuff will come up for her. She is crazzzzzy. jmo:seeya:

[GPSpector]

:confused:I am 'searching' for an answer to this ....... WTHeck is your point?hammer
barf

I am eager to hear the jury say GUILTY and see his toupee hit the ceiling

As I was quickly corrected by my father back in the 70's when I asked about it:
"It is NOT a wig (or toupee), it's a weave"

[GPSpector]

I stand corrected.... a weave is even better...when it comes flying off, it will take his hair and scalp too...

sorry to say bad things about your father...... my father is a loser too... as far as I know, my father has not killed anyone ... or has not been charged (knowing the slimeball my father is... he may have though)

Just wanted to get the facts straight ;) apology accepted :)

As for personal attacks on him, he has a Defense Team to handle that. he made it clear to me that he does not want my help. I just like to make sure the facts are stated, for or against :patriot:

[kennedy06]

Don't panic, CW just merged the newer trial coverage thread with the original one Jayne had started which had been moved to the feedback board. Its now back on the PS board again. All the new posts are there now along with the original postings we started back when. Thanks everyone!!
:)
JMO

[Jayne]

Who is Shuman?

A musician and once president of Julliard...long since deceased. OK...I guess it isn't the same S(c)human? Couldn't resist though..being we're on a thread about a musician.

I dunno...who IS Shuman?

jmo

J

[Jayne]

GPSpector, hugs and :patriot: how you've maintained with integrity this entire time. And irregardless of our fathers, I do not believe the sins/or no-sins are revisted upon us who follow, no matter what book says what, imo. Though in all honesty, my departed Dad will always be my hero and I could never fulfill his footsteps...But what I really came into say: Regarding recents posts in the other thread (for retrial) and in here earlier, there may be some angst regarding TLE and paying for the services of us to watch. It keeps being referred to as "PPV" -- is our possible payment through PPV (with The Legal Edge) as in the PPV we get through cable? I thought the "PPV" was being loosely translated and in that vein, it is being interpreted as a slimey-nogood-scheme by some because of that. I thought it was different from PPV per se. Can someone please clarify this, may be my confusion?


Well, flere..I guess I misinterpreted it as well, even though I still can't afford the asking price. There is a post by MJB I think on the "why not get coverage" thread...he explained it almost to the dollar and was very respectful about it and not a Hard Sell. He impressed me, I must say. Man..I'd love to be a court CAMERA (OK..I know the camera doesn't get those bucks per day..but WOW.) Being from the music industry myself, I have great respect for those in the Arts and I know so many are so terribly UnderPaid (musicians and stage actors (no, not Hollywood movies) are ones I'm most attune to and sympathetic to) and they deserve the bucks and if equipment and travel, etc. cost that much...OK, I understand it. Having been an "employed musician" I know those per diems and meal allowances are a Big Deal, especially considering the near pittance one of us were paid (at the time..not much different today unless with a Big Corp.). Count my lucky stars for having hotel rooms paid for when on tour - but they weren't the Hilton and the food allowance was essentially for grocery shopping, not eating out. But things change or have changed I guess. And, rightfully so.

MJB did say that it's a pay monthly thing but that it lasts the entire trial - no backing out..so I'm not sure if there's an estimate to trial length..you pay all months upfront..but if the trial ends before the end of any 30 day period/month, there is a reimbursement or credit or such. Of course, he is being a good businessman..some wouldn't do that..they'd just say "X" months and that's it...whether it takes that long or not. See..maybe like you (maybe not), I figured PPV meant each time you viewed..whether it was daily to actual live video, or daily to the archive feeds. Problem is..and I understand him and his points...he's not in a business where he can subdize this and have people PPV like we may be used to with cable, etc. Many or most of us would be doing the daily thing, whether it were live or archive. Some would pay as they View.

It's probably an "industry term" and a new one to me and I'm glad I was enlightened that PPV doesn't mean the same thing in two different venues necessarily. Here it sounds to me more like a Monthly Charge, but that you commit to X amount of months..whether it is pay up front or agree to a debit from an account or VISA or the such..I didn't catch that, but that's my guess..and there is no backing out until the trial is over (with a credit..if any credit is due).

Sounds like a reasonable deal. I just can't afford it and it really urks me..NOT MJB...NOT the price..just that I can't afford it. I'll admit..I'd be one of those who would pay 20/month..or let's say 60-100 to keep up the viewing..even though I'd be left to get what I could hear from the rest of you or viewing archives. What I may end up doing is of course not being able to sign on this PPV, but offering a "donation" to make this happen and keep it up, even if not allowed to view anything..live or otherwise. It's too bad some of us aren't neighbors...you share the cost..watch it together..or "report" to each other..for One Price, shared.

I'm essentially "distrustful" and I hope MJB knows it was not personal..if he read my posts...and his response was GREAT. Check it out..it will astound you as to the costs lined out for a daily incamera incourtroom.

JUST JOKING..but let's get out those Old BROWNIE Cameras (I have my Mom's/Dad's...and it can still work...for expensive materials!)..or even the earlier ones by Maddox..and Eastman-Kodak. I'd get a kick out of photos from PS2 in that Sepia.

I'm seeing more sense to this thing..I just wish I could be involved. :(

J

[Jayne]

As I was quickly corrected by my father back in the 70's when I asked about it:
"It is NOT a wig (or toupee), it's a weave"

OH...GPS..you are a Kick...

Back in the 70s I didn't there were any weaves..were there?! Maybein Hollywood, I guess...Still, I get the point! It's actually rather funny.

My father's most salient point to me..from the time I was little was this: Do what I say...not what I do! Because..back then (maybe now with some parents?) he/they realize kids SEE what their parents do..and they either emulate or use it as a "defense"? And no was is "perfect" but they want their children to be as perfect or "better" as possible?

AS a kid..I was always so respectful (still am) and I just did what he SAID (I suppose I still do..to some extent..because now I am trying to help take care of him (without Mom around). Kids try to one up their parents (NO..NOT YOU..I'm not saying that...just expounded on this...)

I find myself saying the same thing to my teenaged son..and thankfully..he's pretty much like me..but a bit more "adventurous" to "test me"..but he finds out..if he doesn't do what I say...it pretty much is a problem. AND..I try really hard..remembering my Dad's words...to walk the talk and not just preach it...although I'm not always totally on in that.

I didn't have a dad with a wig...but I did have a mom with false teeth (bless her heart...lost them at such an early age)...and what did she say, when I asked why THEY came out? BRUSH YOUR TEETH..or ELSE!

Man...I've worn out probably thousands of toothbrushes since then!

LOL

J

[emsdallas]

Here's a link to download the jury questionnaire

http://snipurl.com/4c98z [lasuperiorcourt_org]

https://lasuperiorcourt.org/courtnews/ui/HPDocumentList.aspx?title=People+vs.+Phillip+Spect or&casenum=BA255233&date=2005-10-21%2010:27:06

Great timekiller while waiting for PS2 to begin

;)

[NYGalPal]

A musician and once president of Julliard...long since deceased. OK...I guess it isn't the same S(c)human? Couldn't resist though..being we're on a thread about a musician.

I dunno...who IS Shuman?

jmo

J

Better yet, who is the person accusing this Shuman person of stalking PS and/or herself via videos all over the net?

[FrankieBones1]

A musician and once president of Julliard...long since deceased. OK...I guess it isn't the same S(c)human? Couldn't resist though..being we're on a thread about a musician.

I dunno...who IS Shuman?

jmo

JYou nut.... :)
http://encyclopediadramatica.com/Cheryl_Shuman

[FrankieBones1]

Better yet, who is the person accusing this Shuman person of stalking PS and/or herself via videos all over the net?

Good question, NYGPal. There are always two sides.

[NYGalPal]

Good question, NYGPal. There are always two sides.

I googled both names. From what I can tell, it appears to be one person pretending to be another to cover up their cyber crimes. Scary stuff.

[Ellie]

As True stated, this is about the Phil Spector trial."
Then why do they continue with this doomed effort for PPV. If that's what a limited number of certain posters want then they should express their preference for viewing in PM's or Emails. How they wish to view it has absolutely nothing to do with the trial. IMNSHO:hat:

Pth. Whatever. This IS about the Phil Spector trial, I think it's important for us all to see how many are willing to get on board with ppv if it's the only way we'd see PS2. Very obviously the idea is anything but doomed. :seeya:

[NYGalPal]

You nut.... :)
http://encyclopediadramatica.com/Cheryl_Shuman
My mouth is hanging open.

:eek:

[NYGalPal]

That's too bad. I was looking forward to you being able to partiscipate. I will be there, anonoymously of course. I hope they are able to get all the details worked out.:hat:


Sure you will. You don't participate and you don't sit there anonymously either.

:rolleyes:

[NYGalPal]

Any more updates about jury selection? Trial date start? I can't seem to find anything recent.

Thanks in advance.

[NYGalPal]

NYGalPal, I think I remember they had pushed back voir dire to the 20th to have time to review the questionnaires. Did you/anyone yet see the Jury Questionnaire and 2 sites emsdallas posted earlier? I havent (on 1st coffee) -- and don't have a printer, was thinking this might be handy to print out if it's lengthy so might go to library to do so.

Thank you. Doesn't seem like this trial is getting any news coverage as of late.

I see the links and haven't printed them out. You can save them on your computer, no?

[kennedy06]

:confused:Some how signing up, paying up and viewing is not participating? OH well! to each his own interpetation.JMO

Sure it is participating, also sitting in that courtroom is participating also. Hmmm if you go I wonder where you will be sitting:biggrin: Would you be wearing a pink carnation? :)

JMO

[kennedy06]

Any more updates about jury selection? Trial date start? I can't seem to find anything recent.

Thanks in advance.

I guess like to rest of you may think, the election, bailout and stock market and other things are putting news stories that may have seemed a little more interesting before on the back burner for now. Like PS trial I guess.

JMO

[NYGalPal]

:confused:Some how signing up, paying up and viewing is not participating? OH well! to each his own interpetation.JMO

Might you report to us here what you've heard daily? That would be nice.

[Cornblossom]

Kennedy06, pink carnation :D well something about it has to smell sweet... Of other things going on, I wonder if TRU-TV had planned to cover the K. Miura case with Alan Jackson and Mark Geragos. I don't know what the logistics were with Mr. Jackson representing the people -- but since Miura committed suicide, that possibly clears the docket for more coverage for PS2?
If TRU-TV planned on covering the Miura trial instead of the Spector trial...that would mean AJ would be prosecuting two cases at once-the Miura and Spector...it would be rough on a person to prosecute two high profiled cases at the same time. IMO
:shrug:

[coinoutlet]

I received an email from Legal Edge today stating that they will have an update on the status of PS2 on Wednesday.

[Cornblossom]

I don't know how our esteemed Mr. Jackson was doing so. He was representing The People with two others in the DA's office. I may be grasping at straws here for there to still be gavel-to-gavel coverage for PS2..
IMO..TRU-TV had no intentions of showing the retrial.......the Miura trial wasn't slated to begin the same time the Spector trial was going on,so there would be no conflict in air time.
I believe bringing trials to the people is becoming too much of a strain on TRU-TV. Awhile back,if a station aired a trial-other stations bought feed from it to air...now Michel stated in a post feed is now supplied free to other stations...so TRU-TV probably can't afford too much beings they too are relatively a new station and IMO-their new format isn't working.

[Spectorfan8]

I received the same email from Michel.
I am in agreement about the new TruTV, it sucks. I never watch it, and InSessions isn't much better. jmo

What happened to the wonderful days of Court TV?

[Spectorfan8]

I received an email from Legal Edge today stating that they will have an update on the status of PS2 on Wednesday.


Sorry for being rude in not welcoming you. Welcome to the board. Guilty or Not guilty, we are a little "family", welcome.

SF8

[Cornblossom]

Cornblossom, TRU-TV has turned out to be a read dud, imo, and of many here :sigh: for the days of yore on that one. Strange, though, I thought the "new" one was headed by CNN <--- and one would Think they could do Better :roll eyes:
that is correct..CNN the trial part and TRU-TV the rest-I just find it easier to say the whole thing is TRU-TV LMAO

[Spectorfan8]

Hey, Spectorfan8!! I know, 'Not Reality, Actuality" my a@@! Covering InSession Trials with blablabla from their commentators who have to reiterate before and after commercial (constant) while showing a box of trial going on (if there is one) must be aggravating to say the least for those without a computer. Thank Heavens we have one!!

I'm going to check in with Cloey @ jurorthirteen now. It was she who was in path of fire last night but see she's in chat now so I'll keep this window open too. We you in that area? Hope all is safe..

You said it!!:beer:
No, I am not on the west coast. I hope all is safe for those that are in the fire path.

[kennedy06]

There must be 705 viewers on that thread! OK I will admit honestly that I can see the interest that there is for this poor little beautiful girl over a man that appears to be self centered, PS. thanks

JMO

[True2Blues]

IMO..TRU-TV had no intentions of showing the retrial.......the Miura trial wasn't slated to begin the same time the Spector trial was going on,so there would be no conflict in air time.
I believe bringing trials to the people is becoming too much of a strain on TRU-TV. Awhile back,if a station aired a trial-other stations bought feed from it to air...now Michel stated in a post feed is now supplied free to other stations...so TRU-TV probably can't afford too much beings they too are relatively a new station and IMO-their new format isn't working.

With CNN as a sister station, I'd think there would be enough of a budget to show live trials. Maybe they should work out deals with other stations who want to cover different trials, so that everyone pays in a little in order to make it possible if it's a problem.

As far as PS, if they didn't consider covering before they should have once the date was set and they started getting emails about it, IMO. It's still a murder trial. Oh well, who can say what they're thinking? IF they're thinking.

[kennedy06]

With CNN as a sister station, I'd think there would be enough of a budget to show live trials. Maybe they should work out deals with other stations who want to cover different trials, so that everyone pays in a little in order to make it possible if it's a problem.

As far as PS, if they didn't consider covering before they should have once the date was set and they started getting emails about it, IMO. It's still a murder trial. Oh well, who can say what they're thinking? IF they're thinking.

I agree. Well I hurried to the tv to IS to see what the C. A. excitment is about but there is a FL bombing trial being covered and when I looked on here 4 viewing it and discussing it.

I'll be here for PS, I have enjoyed the posters on this board whether we see it or not. If we only discuss it a couple of times a week, you guys are sharp and the reason give of suicide well sometimes I wonder if that whole idea doesn't cut a little deeper with PS. If he came up with that idea and I think you guys can read inbetween the line on that one. I believe if I have read articles or books correctly, he was an older boy, and I say this respectfully, when he realized how is Father passed away. I don't say that to be unkind towards PS either. JMO

[KathR]

With CNN as a sister station, I'd think there would be enough of a budget to show live trials. Maybe they should work out deals with other stations who want to cover different trials, so that everyone pays in a little in order to make it possible if it's a problem.

As far as PS, if they didn't consider covering before they should have once the date was set and they started getting emails about it, IMO. It's still a murder trial. Oh well, who can say what they're thinking? IF they're thinking.

I'm still trying to find the ulterior motive for our getting any trial coverage at all from what remains of CTV. I've lost all hope of our getting back what we lost.

We know CNN isn't interested in providing a public service with In-Session because they put only 6 hours a day into it. Why stop at 6?


Why didn't they ditch the whole idea of broadcasting trials. As it is now they do more harm than good. If another group of investors (ha ha, at this time what a thought) were to want to set up broadcasting trials they would have to contend with the remains of CTV to get rights. Or perhaps anyone that might be interested would mistakenly think such coverage continuted to exist, when it doesn't.

[bearwds]

Sorry for being rude in not welcoming you. Welcome to the board. Guilty or Not guilty, we are a little "family", welcome.

SF8
*****************************

Welcome....I'm cousin It.


bearwds

[GPSpector]

Was going to download the aforementioned Jury Questionnaire but alerted re: security certificate so I'll do that at the library and print out there. :beer: with Root Beer and :seeya:

As always, what I post is IMO, to the best that I know, et al.

Yea, I was surprised at the Security warnings as well when I downloaded it. I was surprised to find that the Doc is listed as having 36 pages 8o

[GPSpector]

Was going to download the aforementioned Jury Questionnaire but alerted re: security certificate so I'll do that at the library and print out there. :beer: with Root Beer and :seeya:

As always, what I post is IMO, to the best that I know, et al.

Yea, I was surprised at the Security warnings as well when I downloaded it. I was surprised to find that the Doc is listed as having 36 pages

[kennedy06]

I opened one link to the questionaire and it said that, another nice poster also posted one on the links page for it. After asking my original jury questionaire question, another poster reminded me of this link. I always feel funny about posting this link, even though it says for media and has been posted many times. It works good for me but then I wasn't going to print it. JMO

http://www.lasuperiorcourt.org/courtnews/ui/HPDocumentList.aspx?title=People+vs.+Phillip+Spect or&casenum=BA255233&date=2005-10-21%2010:27:06

[Spectorfan8]

I opened one link to the questionaire and it said that, another nice poster also posted one on the links page for it. After asking my original jury questionaire question, another poster reminded me of this link. I always feel funny about posting this link, even though it says for media and has been posted many times. It works good for me but then I wasn't going to print it. JMO

http://www.lasuperiorcourt.org/courtnews/ui/HPDocumentList.aspx?title=People+vs.+Phillip+Spect or&casenum=BA255233&date=2005-10-21%2010:27:06

I had the same problem, so I came back and saw your link. Like you, I wasn't going to print it out. We have had this link before, but it still works for me.;)

[kennedy06]

I had the same problem, so I came back and saw your link. Like you, I wasn't going to print it out. We have had this link before, but it still works for me.;)

Hi SPF8, I have read a few of those documents, very interesting no matter which side we are leaning at the moment.:)

I really like the deposition one (2005). It is 88 pages but, it is a short read really. I was surprised at the VT motion filed on 10/2.



JMO

[kennedy06]

Maybe I spoke to soon. I clicked now and they load but all I end up with is a blank page, maybe its just my computer I hope so. JMOhammer

[Spectorfan8]

Maybe I spoke to soon. I clicked now and they load but all I end up with is a blank page, maybe its just my computer I hope so. JMOhammer

Oh, don't do hammer. I have had the same thing happen to me. Don't worry.......be happy!! lol:)

[GPSpector]

Hi SPF8, I have read a few of those documents, very interesting no matter which side we are leaning at the moment.:)

I really like the deposition one (2005). It is 88 pages but, it is a short read really. I was surprised at the VT motion filed on 10/2.



JMO


Any guesses as to how the Judge will rule on this new Motion:rolleyes:

[kennedy06]

Wow -- Thank you, kennedy06, much to take in -- I'll have to wait til the other gang leaves and sorry 'bout my previous post...

Life can be such a bore or boor when we're trying to concentrate on our trial here;)

Your posts are fine and thanks for that link earlier today to C. A., that is something else to say the least.

I read this today about a case D. W. is also defending. I noted the starting date of that trial is Jan 5. I don't know if attorney's overlap trials but I do wonder if this is somewhat of an indication that maybe PS may not last that long possibly:shrug:

http://www.smdailyjournal.com/article_preview.php?id=99437

JMO

[kennedy06]

Any guesses as to how the Judge will rule on this new Motion:rolleyes:

I don't know, I will admit it was pretty damming stuff. I mean that was where the bullet in women's heads comment came from. Being a woman I take offense to that and hey as far as I know the only other person that wouldn't mind seeing me gone might have been hiding out in the mountains of Tora Bora. Not to over exaggerate the comment, but still I really don't know of any men that would speak like that about a woman. So you know it just doesn't fair to well for him, whether he meant it or not.

JMO

[kennedy06]

wow, I just looked over on our links thread at the ktla msg bd link. Just curious what maybe be said over there about PS or whatever. It said service suspended or something like that.:shrug: JMO

[tartangirl]

I stopped by ktla on my rounds this evening and saw that also. The only thing that came to mind was the wildfires. I hope all is well. Just include a few more in my nightly prayers and good thoughts list....keeps on getting longer ;)

~as always, my opinion, Justice for Lana and those who love her ~

[GPSpector]

Well, I guess tomorrow is the big day to see if TLE will be covering the Trial. Has there been any news updates?

All I can say is that I'll miss Beth's coverage this time around.

[coinoutlet]

Does anyone know what Beth is currently doing?

[GPSpector]

It's amazing how the hopeless can try so hard to discourage the hope in others.:rolleyes:

[KathR]

I wonder if anyone is betting on how it will turn out. Personally I feel I can't loose. If I bet against them and should loose that bet I still win because the feed to other outlets is "FREE". It's a real WIN,WIN and I haven't spent a dime.:cool:

Do you win if the the trial isn't taped at all? If there is no feed?

BTW, what other outlets must get the feed free? TV stations? Well, they would have to broadcast it for you to see it. I would expect that the feed would only have to go free to those who entered into an agreement before the taping began and gave up their own right to tape the trial for consideration.

Meanwhile, have we heard a decision today? Will TLE do it or not?

[kennedy06]

Since the effort that was doomed from it's inception(JMO),ie.,PPV, appears to be failing(JMO), why don't you and others of like mind pool your $ and order transcripts from the court reporter. It is a public record but it is also very expensive. Granted reading it is not as dramatic as a live feed and you probably couldn't get it every day. BTW IMO the provider for the PPV may have provided their own undoing. Interest for their service seem to drop when they stated the feed would go "FREE" to other media outlets. Kudos for them. At least they were honest about it. They of course are looking at the numbers. Speaking of numbers have you looked at them in relation to the post on other subjects of interest on this messg. board. Examples:Spector/Post,2,239 vs. Presd. Elct./P 75,564, Amber Alerts/P10,188, Crrent Crimes/P 9,705, OJ(even with the trial over)P 8,598,Entertianment/P 14,521, Games/P 98,804, and on and on. I'm confident that other media have their own numbers when it comes to public interest. Number of viewers = $. It's the American way.:patriot::hat:

Yes, I look at the numbers but, I believe your numbers are skewed somewhat. You have to take into consideration as to how many threads are on those boards and how long they have been active also. Many of our threads over the past year have simply vanished for no understandable reason, including PS archived threads. This is just a fledgling board, we are just sort of gathering on the eve of the trial with only 2 active threads. I didn't join into the 1st PS board till after that trial started.

Do I think this next trial would garner the same amount of posters as last time, maybe not, but still a good portion more than the pipe bomb trial on IS today or even the OJ trial in Las Vegas. I noticed it never had a large amount of viewers on any particular day, compared to other more notable trials that were watched and posted on. I will say this for lawjerk his coverage of the OJ trial was great, he had some great interviews. They are still over there, every one from OJ to Dominick D. So that is one reason why I do hope he will somehow cover PS, even if he just does a few interviews for his own notariety (not PPV) and allows us to view them.

The CA board is hot, so hot it is hard to post and read. Many of those posters followed the PS trial but, their interest is rightfully so on another crime at the moment. While CA mother awaits her trial, and if they seen the PS trial televised they would once again join in. The election thread well that will take time to cool off!!!

I'm not interested in transcripts at the moment. If no PPV then audio only would be just fine with me. There are places on the internet to view the pictures of the witnesses and crime scene photos.

JMO

[kennedy06]

:beer:I'm sure with you on that one.:cool:

I'm glad you are seeing the light, with the virus like chicken little attitude that some in the media and elsewhere have that PS and Lana C. trial isn't worth the time or effort to cover, or that there is no interest.

I would like to add one thing since you were with us on some of those threads that vanished. I often notice view counts on threads from one day to the next. There were days those threads with the trial a long ways off would get over 100 views a day with how few of us actually posting. We weren't the ones viewing it all those times. Others were interested also.:read:

[kennedy06]

IMO only because of the media driven hype and sensationalism. The old CTV included.:hat:

We would only get new news about every month and a half so media driven on some days but not every day by any means. I speak about interest in the PS/LC trial when thinking about those that would view a live trial, not to the public in general that doesn't watch them. JMO

[Spectorfan8]

I'm like Kennedy, I would take audio coverage over no coverage. I came here during the last trial, and got hooked!! ;)

Like you guys, I miss Beth. She was great during the last trial. :(

[kennedy06]

I was looking at the questions on the questionaire. I wonder why they would want to know if you had ever served in combat? Maybe that is a standard question?

JMO

[tartangirl]

I believe it might have to do with the fact that Adriano was in the service in his country...or because some people who come out of combat...are a little shell shocked...sorry. I do not mean to offend anyone. It does happen. Combat and that could quite possibly cloud a person's thinking about guns.

Just a thought..:)


~ as always, my opinion, Justice for Lana and those who love her ~

[kennedy06]

Thanks Tartangirl.

I guess someone forgot to tell those across the big pond, no one is interested. There they are talking about it. Well maybe someone should whisper it to Mr. K (at the bottom of the article, media attention) there is no interest:cool:

I know same old, same old. I couldn't resist:tongue:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7669469.stm

JMO

[bearwds]

I was looking at the questions on the questionaire. I wonder why they would want to know if you had ever served in combat? Maybe that is a standard question? JMO
********************

Maybe to see if you could stand up under pressure. Leadership..??

As to interest in PS-1, the daily views per open running Board were around 20,000. The Boards flew so fast one was constantly behind. The deliberation board ran until 1-am EST, with many folks on.

Something that seems apparent in all Boards, the ratio of Posts to viewer hits is about 10:1.


bearwds

[kennedy06]

:eek:I would think a major concern for some folks would be is ISMB going to continue to allow post on PS2. It appears the powers in charge are not interested and the same seems true for other outlets. If you are fortunate enough that TLE comes thru with coverage, do you think ISMB will continue with this thread. I would guess not, but then you never know. Anyway, GOOD LUCK(sincerly) on getting your daily trial injections. If you don't get live coverage remember that :chicken: Little lied to Henny Penny. Life will go on. Personally It does not bother me in the least if there is or is not coverage. This board on occasion has been good for stimulating the little grey cells. BTW and meaning no disrespect or anything sarcastic, are you sure you don't have some Irish in your genes. SeeYa.

I can understand why it won't bother you, you don't seem that interested in the evidence anyway. Well at least the evidence that seems to point towards guilt.

JMO

[tartangirl]

********************

Maybe to see if you could stand up under pressure. Leadership..??

As to interest in PS-1, the daily views per open running Board were around 20,000. The Boards flew so fast one was constantly behind. The deliberation board ran until 1-am EST, with many folks on.

Something that seems apparent in all Boards, the ratio of Posts to viewer hits is about 10:1.


bearwds

That makes a lot of sense....I like the way you think..Pressure, leadership. To be able to stand up to another juror when you do not agree with them. Or to tell the judge when things are not being handled the proper way in the jury room during deliberation...:)

PS1 was so fast that I had a headache most days and could barely read much less post. Sure was a lot of interest then...and still is as far as I am concerned.

~as always, my opinion, Justice for Lana and those who love her ~

[KathR]

Thanks Tartangirl.

I guess someone forgot to tell those across the big pond, no one is interested. There they are talking about it. Well maybe someone should whisper it to Mr. K (at the bottom of the article, media attention) there is no interest:cool:

I know same old, same old. I couldn't resist:tongue:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7669469.stm

JMO

I think TPTB thought there would be more interest in OJ's recent trial than there was. They were surprised by the lack of interest in the latest OJ trial. I wasn't interested in it. It was an ugly subject. All I wanted to know was the verdict. Of course, if OJ were somehow being retried for the crime of killing his wife, I'd have been riveted to the screen again.

TPTB concluded that because not many were interested in the OJ second trial, people would not be interested in PS2. Of course, they couldn't be more wrong. This is still the same trial. It has the same drama as the first.

Hey, does anyone think BBC might be interested in broadcasting PS2. I'd be happy to surf the pond every day.

[KathR]

I'm like Kennedy, I would take audio coverage over no coverage. I came here during the last trial, and got hooked!! ;)

Like you guys, I miss Beth. She was great during the last trial. :(


Audio would be good enough for me. I often just listened to trials on CTV even when they did broadcast live. We could listen and keep up with a bulletin board, maybe here, maybe on TLE (if I can ever get past their buggy software and register with that site).

[Spectorfan8]

Audio would be good enough for me. I often just listened to trials on CTV even when they did broadcast live. We could listen and keep up with a bulletin board, maybe here, maybe on TLE (if I can ever get past their buggy software and register with that site).

You are still having problems? What happens when you try to register?
Send Michel an email telling him you are having trouble. Maybe he can help you. jmo :)

[Jayne]

I was looking at the questions on the questionaire. I wonder why they would want to know if you had ever served in combat? Maybe that is a standard question?

JMO

Just shooting from the hip here (pun intended several ways!). If one serves in combat they essentially are taking the "oath" to defend the country - meaning, they will take life. Question's answer could be interpreted different ways I suppose: support the death penalty or punishment for committing a "wrong" (I know PS is not up for the death penalty..), Stand up to something that is expected of you such as "passing judgement" according to the "rules"? Not fall apart under pressure? Ever been faced with extreme adversity? and, perhaps..have you ever killed anyone? Accidentally or "on purpose"? Without asking those 'exact questions'. Does seem a bit strange of a question, but it may be coming through the backdoor for responses - jury selection psychology? I've never seen it as a standard question in other states I'm much more familiar with, but perhaps it is a "standard boilerplate question". It certainly isn't relevant to PS or Lana as far as having served in combat, unless I don't know something about either of them having served in the services. But, the answers may be quite relevant or relating to what each or either side is searching for in 'disposition' of the juror who answers. Since this is a questionnaire, I imagine the gender and age of the person is not included, so that may be a "little" telling, as to age, anyway, but not necessarily.

I suppose the answer is a simple Yes or No...but what lies behind it is speculation for interpretation.

[KathR]

What about contacting writers such as Mick B. or well I almost hate to say this because I know he is in poor health but Dominick. D. they were interested in the last trial and it may be the only way they can view it also. They may have some clout dropping a line here or there and that would help with accessing more viewers?

LOL maybe even Anita Talbert! She is pro Phil from what I have seen and read. JMO

WE are trying our best on this end :)

Thanks!

I wonder if Dominic Dunne can get Vanity Faire to feed the trial on their website:)

Here's a link to him. Too bad, I can't find any contact information on this page.

http://www.vanityfair.com/magazine/bios/dominick_dunne/search?contributorName=Dominick%20Dunne

[Jayne]

HAHAHA..of COURSE you'd flunk pages 18-19..so would the great majority of us on these threads!

#47..pretty much boilerplate..they're looking (both sides) for close connection in any of those areas and in particular Prosecution or Defense or Judge or Police, etc. My father was never called to jury service until after I was already a DA and he said they asked them all some questions then asked him if he was related...blah blah blah. He was excused, so to speak. For the past 20 years, the few times he's been called back, he's always been excused. And one of them he realy wanted to "sit on". It all depends on the case, the peremptory and for cause challenges, etc.

That's a pretty extensive questionnaire..and now with being able to see the link, I understand the "combat" question..it was "hidden" in a boilerplate sort of "census" type question.

thanks for the link..

J

Hi Jayne and kennedy I finally had to go to the your link and questionnaire…Repeat here but maybe you can put on links page too? I know, you Have done enough:
http://www.lasuperiorcourt.org/courtnews/ui/HPDocumentList.aspx?title=People+vs.+Phillip+Spect or&casenum=BA255233&date=2005-10-21%2010:27:06 -- while we wait, my few notes…thought interesting they ask questions for both “spouse/partner” and some even as on Question 47 “if you or anyone close to you have any employment, education, training, experience in …” 2 pages of careers, etc. and check off boxes for You, Spouse/Partner, Friend. On pages 18 and 19, I’d flunk there ‘paid attention to publicized cases, followed or paid attention to (OJ, Blake, Jackson, etc. All those TV programs, magazing ?s…The potential witness list on p.31 and 32 for googling if really get antsy while waiting.

In all seriousness, kennedy, you mentioned Vincent Tannazzo motion (the first one listed on 10/2) and besides Weinberg, Dennis Riordan is other attorney filing -- and DR is the one who was such a hair-splitter during Jury Instructions, remember? I suspect he has had his nit-picking hand in these Jury Instructions too -- for verbal questioning when they
Voir Dire and also … in possible appeal they weren’t forthcoming but as in…who doesn’t know “friend” who isn’t today’s butcher, baker, candlestick maker…

Did anyone on PS1 Jury ever go into detail as to the two hold-outs, their “reasoning”? I wonder if it was the … wording, a la Riordon which created the sewer backup….?

[kennedy06]

I wonder if Dominic Dunne can get Vanity Faire to feed the trial on their website:)

Here's a link to him. Too bad, I can't find any contact information on this page.

http://www.vanityfair.com/magazine/bios/dominick_dunne/search?contributorName=Dominick%20Dunne

Hi, since you mention him, a couple of days ago on one of my utube adventures I found this clip about a movie or show about him, After the Party I believe it is called. In this clip he is at the Castle gates. I enjoyed reading his articles. He did a god job covering PS. It's sad to hear he is not well. JMO

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0HeTChbGsIY

[kennedy06]

I don't remember all the detail now of those 2 jurors but I'm sure many of our posters do flere. As far as the questionaire, I was amazed at the magazines and tv shows they asked about.

Jayne, I thought the other explanations were good about the combat but I will say your idea, sort of the subtle way of did you ever shoot someone accidentally or on purpose is also a really good thought on it.

JMO

[Jayne]

Hey Jayne, but did you watch Dennis Riordan -- he was guy on speaker phone and really...he just tore into those JI that I could call him a psych. term of pinching cheeks but I don't know if that's allowed. And he came into PS1 at the 11th hour and it went on for days...that's what was so esp. aggravating. And now he has a heavy hand in creating/authoring this specific Jury Questionnaire I heavily suspect, at the beginning this time. It's all about wording, right?;)

Good Lord Yes. He IS the PhoneMan! Had me between stitches and wanting to smash the TV!

Sure..a lot of it is wording..but I read the questionnaire and it's a lot of "boilerplate"..almost like job applications or applying for insurance coverage. LOL! What I did read through just an hour ago is the Tannazzo motion..the points and authorities, etc. Riordan has some pretty good law clerks on board, because I just can't imagine he'd have used the words used in that motion..some very Puffy others very Sophomoric (not that we all can't be guilty of that...but somehow Telephone Man just doesn't impress me that he'd have used some of those words/terms). His argument reminds me of the telephone arguments. Points are good...but ..and this is a but from a prosecution side...remoteness is one argument, indeed..and relevance is another and it can be in disregard of remoteness if it shows not a propensity but a "motive"...perhaps not directed AT Lana..but a motive directed towards women..misogynistic in a sense, I suppose..hatred of women and if "dissed by one..ANY ONE" a bullet in their head. If he said it..several times and on more than one occasion prior to 2003...1993 and again sometime..sure that's 10 years and he wasn't talking about Lana, but he was revealing not just a character trait (evidence code objections) but a propensity (ok arguable to not allow)..and now the prosecution has brought in this Greek Math Theory...which ties right into Tannazzo's testimony. Sort of this, as I see it (but of course I can be wrong or misinterpreting how it will be used)..if a person pulls a gun on people when s/he isn't getting his or her way time and time again, it is most probable and likely that s/he did it this time (Lana's demise). If a person has used terminology against particularly females in such a crude, aggressive, and "gonna get them" attitude, it likely follows that the same attitude, crudeness, aggressiveness and "gonna get them" attitude was present the night Lana died. Dunno...just a guess. 1101 (a) and (b) are interesting and mind boggling to understand and interpret, I think even for the lawyers, courts. The prior bad act has to be "relevant" "probative" and NOT "prejudicial". I think Riordan is trying his best and he's many years experience, but I think the motion was "lacking" in convinceability, despite how well it was written and argued.

jmo

J

[Jayne]

kennedy, you are the link queen of this thread! I started out with a sniffle on that but ended up laffing. His writing has that quality too!! Thanks again, I needed that:)

Jayne, yes! Dennis Riordan reminded me of Donald Sutherland without the charisma.

OMG! I never even thought of that..the voice..voice quality. You GOT it! Donald Sutherland...brings up memories of the OLD MASH movie, as well! I had at first thought of the guy with the clear eyes commercial, Ben Stein! NO inflection at all in his voice. Would bore a jury to tears, IMO!

:)

J

[GPSpector]

Maybe the reason for the Questionare being as long as it is, is to eliminate as many people as possible so that the Defense can claim that this case can not go to trial because there are not enough eligible Jurors.:shrug:

[coinoutlet]

MJB says he will officially call Judge Fidler this morning to tell him that LE is no longer interested. This is posted on his blog.

[GPSpector]

Well, it's not that no one is interested, it's just that there were not 1,000 people here interested in paying to see what others could show free if TLE did it.

I do hope that he does not tell the Judge that no one is interested because he would be implying the wrong message. Besides, I never did hear about where else he was looking for interested viewers. I read he had a friend he worked with at Court TV that now has a Sirrus Radio Station but I never heard that he had anything mentioned over the airwaves.

I hope I was not correct in thinking that he relied just on us on this board to determin if there was enough interest because that would not have been fair look at the interest value.

[kennedy06]

Well Que Sera Sera right!

I'll continue to post, I'm sure others will attend the trial now and then and let us in on how things are. There will be articles and what not. I don't forsee a complete black out on this trial. So why we have had a major setback, we can still continue on the best we can. No one is going to tell me what I'm interested in or not.

OK we had one poster say he was going to take an rv with a free philly banner out to the trial, now which one is going to have their thumb out with the cardboard sign saying Spector or bust!!:D

It will all work out.:patriot:

[Spectorfan8]

Well, it's not that no one is interested, it's just that there were not 1,000 people here interested in paying to see what others could show free if TLE did it.

I do hope that he does not tell the Judge that no one is interested because he would be implying the wrong message. Besides, I never did hear about where else he was looking for interested viewers. I read he had a friend he worked with at Court TV that now has a Sirrus Radio Station but I never heard that he had anything mentioned over the airwaves.

I hope I was not correct in thinking that he relied just on us on this board to determin if there was enough interest because that would not have been fair look at the interest value.

G,
I think he is talking about Vinnie Politan with Sirrus Radio. I may be wrong.
I do feel that MB was only relying on those of us here.

[CakeGurl]

Beth K has left Tru TV also???

where have i been?

where did dhe go?

[Jassyca]

re: the two hold-outs. If I recall correctly, I don't think the jury foreman (who was one of the hold-outs) ever said what his thoughts were on the way he voted. But the second hold-out said (and I'm paraphrasing) she was simply not going to make a decision, she was just going to vote on however the jury foreman voted. If he had voted guilty, she would have too. He didn't so she didn't. Simple as that. (Which, honestly, that still just flabbergasts me. You have someone's fate in the palm of your hands, how can you be so.. so.. flippant about it? :eek: Not sure if "flippant" is quite the right word I"m looking for but it's close to the attitude I'm thinking of.)

re: veteran experience on the jury questionaire. I have to wonder if the defense's thoughts there might have something to do with Phil's driver. He was a veteran. One of the armed forces for Brazil, if I remember right? I don't think he was a combat veteran but he had been in the forces. As such, would another vet (combat vet or not) be able to judge whether or not someone was holding a gun from so-n-so many feet away, etc? If there aren't any vets (or hunters too, perhaps?) on the jury, then that means those on the jury may not have anyone among them who can give an "expert" opinion.


:rose: Justice for Lana (fingers crossed!)

[kennedy06]

I have brought Bobbieblue's link about the jury and motion from the no coverage thread over here. I don't know if those threads will be removed eventually and I didn't want us to loose it.

http://www.mercurynews.com/breakingnews/ci_10739518

JMO

[warhorse46]

Beth K has left Tru TV also???

where have i been?

where did dhe go?



I think you have some incorrect information.

[Spectorfan8]

I believe that whoever posted about Beth meant that they will miss her coverage of the Spector trial. I think she did a wonderful job covering the trial. I for one, will miss her coverage of this trial.
To be honest, I don't watch InSessions anymore. My guess is she is still there. jmo

[warhorse46]

I believe that whoever posted about Beth meant that they will miss her coverage of the Spector trial. I think she did a wonderful job covering the trial. I for one, will miss her coverage of this trial.
To be honest, I don't watch InSessions anymore. My guess is she is still there. jmo


I know she is.

[CakeGurl]

I know she is.

thanks. i misunderstood the post about missing her to mean she was gone. thanks!

[GPSpector]

* Phil's alcohol consumption the night Lana lost her life was more than he stated in his Deposition, isn't it? If so, he perjured himself.

I might be mistaken, but I believe that his BAL was measured 12 hours after the death occured so that would mean that he could probably claim anything since no one knows the facts about what it was at the time of death. although, to quote something different than was recorded is also not good either.

[Spectorfan8]

I know she is.

She is the best they have there.

[GPSpector]

She is the best they have there.

And after getting to meet her, I was very impressed with her as a person, not just as a reporter.

[GPSpector]

GPS, yes though specifics elude me, many hours (12?) later blood was drawn. But to all the witnesses (those who served him), the chauffeur's testimony, etc., the specific drinks and how much alcohol in each = more than three. He says in depo. he never has more than three. ?


Was this stated in a new Depo, or the original? I know he had made a claims that he was not drunk, that he did not have any drinks, did not takes his Meds for 24 hours and that it was only Lana that was drunk when she came over to his Castle to commit suicide, but I don't think those comments were in the original Depo.

[GPSpector]

Well, it looks like Vincent Tannazzo will be returning for Round 2:
http://www.contactmusic.com/news.nsf/article/ex-cop%20called%20back%20to%20testify%20against%20spe ctor_1083880

[kennedy06]

Well, it looks like Vincent Tannazzo will be returning for Round 2:
http://www.contactmusic.com/news.nsf/article/ex-cop%20called%20back%20to%20testify%20against%20spe ctor_1083880

Thanks GP, As on another thread I had posted and was replied to by hiitsme, I think the exact use of the word/words is important. I don't see a need to sanitize it myself but then you don't have to look or go far to hear a variety of profanity nowadays. Its all relevant to me.

I just read the new link on the links thread. Sounds like the defense will be more organized this time. I didn't catch or realize the judge had ruled against the pros using Norma K.JMO

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-spector19-2008oct19,0,6586930.story

JMO

[tartangirl]

This link has some news that I had not read before. Some remarks by the defense that make them sound just as full of themselves as the last defense team was.

I did not know the sixth PBA witness was not going to be able to testify. Reminders of what were the main side issues, a Hollywood madame, DR. LEE, and the mysterious familiar sounding name that turned out to be an imposter.

Also a note that interest in this case has fallen off considerably...what?

Not here it has not...we might be here, there and everywhere on any given day ..but the majority of us are very interested and waiting and ready to go...;)

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-spector19-2008oct19,0,6586930.story

so..read it and weep...or shake your head like I did...also posted on the links thread.

~as always, my opinion, Justice for Lana and those who love her ~

[kennedy06]

Tartangirl I read that also about the interest once again.:confused:

It can't be compared to OJ1 or disasters happening in peoples own backyards. If that is their guage for interest or against the stockmarket or election, then maybe then they are using the wrong yardstick and yes I think interest would be dropping probably at the moment. Its about a trial and trial coverage. If cases of general interest are worthy of coverage on IS then PS case is also worth covering.

JMO

[tartangirl]

tartangirl, thanks for the link here and also in the LINKS thread. The last sentence, ?? no TV coverage requested ?? Harriet Ryan, yes I remember her from her reporting from the 1st trial...That photo of Phil, I almost feel sorry for him.

Trying to take the weekend "off" -- maybe I should stop email-forwarding, lol...

No coverage requested...it is beyond my understanding how that can be true. Really!!

Well, as for the appearance of PS, it is all bound to catch up to a person sometime...the deeds are starting to show in his face. It is not good either. :rolleyes:

~as always, my opinion, Justice for Lana and those who love her ~

[True2Blues]

No coverage requested...it is beyond my understanding how that can be true. Really!!

Well, as for the appearance of PS, it is all bound to catch up to a person sometime...the deeds are starting to show in his face. It is not good either. :rolleyes:

~as always, my opinion, Justice for Lana and those who love her ~


Hi Tartangirl,
No interest huh? What are we, chopped liver? :D Just because the only person who cared what we, the viewers, wanted to see is MJB...I guess she meant no interest on the part of media outlets, except one (Thank You Michel).

Just think what PS would look like if all of his nasty deeds caught up with him at once. :eek:

[joolz]

Lana is down to two lit candles right now. Please light one for her.

http://www.gratefulness.org/candles/candles.cfm?l=eng&gi=lana

:rose::rose::rose:

[True2Blues]

Thank you Joolz.

[GPSpector]

Lana is down to two lit candles right now. Please light one for her.

http://www.gratefulness.org/candles/candles.cfm?l=eng&gi=lana

:rose::rose:

Thank you, I just added 2 and she is now up to 12 :rose:

[wasapi]

Two from me as well. I believe I counted 16 in all.

She will not be forgotten.

[tartangirl]

Good Morning,

Well, we have the beginning of jury selection today. This short blurb is just a recap. It is something though, and I am always glad for that.
85 prospective jurors, certainly a fair minded jury can be found in that good amount of civic minded citizens in Los Angeles County.


http://www.wavenewspapers.com/default.asp?sourceid=&smenu=71&twindow=&mad=&sdetail=10765&wpage=1&skeyword=&sidate=&ccat=&ccatm=&restate=&restatus=&reoption=&retype=&repmin=&repmax=&rebed=&rebath=&subname=&pform=&sc=1019&hn=wavenewspapers&he=.com


Just trying to keep the memory fresh for Lana and those who love her.

~as always, my opinion ~

[FrankieBones1]

And after getting to meet her, I was very impressed with her as a person, not just as a reporter.
How tall is she? I know, what an odd question but I'm curious.

Is she as pretty in person as she is on TV?

[True2Blues]

Good Morning,

Well, we have the beginning of jury selection today. This short blurb is just a recap. It is something though, and I am always glad for that.
85 prospective jurors, certainly a fair minded jury can be found in that good amount of civic minded citizens in Los Angeles County.


http://www.wavenewspapers.com/default.asp?sourceid=&smenu=71&twindow=&mad=&sdetail=10765&wpage=1&skeyword=&sidate=&ccat=&ccatm=&restate=&restatus=&reoption=&retype=&repmin=&repmax=&rebed=&rebath=&subname=&pform=&sc=1019&hn=wavenewspapers&he=.com


Just trying to keep the memory fresh for Lana and those who love her.

~as always, my opinion ~

:seeya: I'm sure they can find a fair minded jury. Since this is a retrial there will be those who already have an opinion and those who just weren't interested and didn't follow it the first time. I'm sure there were plenty of people too busy with their own lives to get involved in any of it.

[tartangirl]

Just read this link and had a few thoughts about the work that the judge and the lawyers have cut out for them this week. A lot of very decisive work. Extra good thoughts go out to those fine men and women from the prosecutor's office.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20081020/phil-spector/


Many thanks to that jury from PS1. Much time was taken from their lives to sit and try do the civic responsibility that we all are granted in this country. That said...

The judge asking them if they can follow his instructions. That right there is part of the reason we are back again to give Mr. Spector another chance at remaining a free man. The jury from the mistrial could not have understood his instructions. Or possibly in the long months of listening and learning all of the facts they had already picked out a forman and were going to listen to him no matter what he said. Taking the easy way to a foreman did not mean that they gave up their right to voice an opinion or use their own powers of deduction.


From what we have read from one of the jurors from PS1, the foreman
did not understand the judges instructions. He did not listen to the other jurors. If only one person had said they were confused or needed to talk to the judge concerning the forman's bully tactics, this whole trial might have been avoided. If they had to by pass the foreman to get to the judge, so be it. It could have been carried out easily and quickly.


I have no doubt that those chosen will be fair and impartial. The judge wants them to leave their agendas at the door...my words...I truly hope so. My hope is for those on this new jury being selected to keep their thoughts and words close to their lips and speak when something is not being done according to the instructions. Common sense and logic along with all of the facts will go a long way to a clear and strong verdict decision. We can only hope.

~as always, my opinion, Justice for Lana and those who love her ~

[GPSpector]

How tall is she? I know, what an odd question but I'm curious.

Is she as pretty in person as she is on TV?

She's about my height and yes, just as pretty in person.

[GPSpector]

Thank you for all your updates: it sounds, so far, that the Jurors resonding are being very diligent. I (still) have faith in our Jury System. Thank you for bringing up @ the Foreman from PS1. When they were coming back in possibly not reaching a unanimous decision I wondered then by the questions being posed whether or not the Foreman was stymieing it. (And my questioning) -- as Judge Fidler responded -- did the Jury have a right to choose a new Foreman during deliberations if they so wanted? (I didn't get an answer on that) -- Judge Fidler did not address that in his response/s either.

(Especially) Knowing what we do following it declared a mistrial ... I wonder if the Jury can? And if they could, and had been able to, if the outcome would have been different? Maybe this issue (of choosing a Foreman, changing one) should be addressed when the Jury is released to its deliberations...:shrug:

Yes, the Jury had the Right to change the Foreman but they stated that they were not aware of that option due the information they were given by the Foreman. I do not know all the details but it sounded like the Foreman was actually interfering with the process by not allowing certain process to take place. The Jury can change the person voted to that position (by the jurors) at any time, I believe they just need to notify the Judge of their wish and the reason. it was the Foreman that informed them that they could not discuss any issue with the Judge since all issues had to go through the foreman, which is incorrect information. the only reason for voting for a foreman is so that the judge would know who will read the verdict, that's it, no other privileges are granted to a foreman.

As for how the outcome could have been different, if foreman was allowed to stay on the jury, he still would have voted "Not Guilty" but Juror 1 would have voted "Guilty" since she just wanted to copy the vote of whomever the foreman was. If Juror #10 (the foreman) was removed, we would not be discussing a new trial.

[GPSpector]

Since it seems that Gerald1 has some serious issues with me and my character and as the policies seem to protect the harasser, I can not post his PM's here.

He has accused me of not being truthful with the posters here. I have asked him for proof of his claims and he has yet to provide any. And I have informed him that I would be happy to answer all his question and claims. I would like to discuss it here, only because he includes all of you in his claims and wanted me to post a public apology and come clean with all of you and I can not really do that in a PM, now can I.

He seems to be to much of a coward so, since integrity is something I refuse to have him or anyone else try to take from me, I thought I would post this here so that i could answer any and all questions and claims here that pertain to any untruths related to any of my prior postings.

Despite my nickname "Spectre", I do not choose to hide in the shadows. If anyone here would like to ask a question or get clarification on something I have stated before, please feel free to ask.

I really look forward to Gerald1's comments most of all. I have asked him to stop contacting me in PM but since he insists on using PM's as a free and protected ride to harass me and he has ignored all my requests, that is why I bring it here.

I want to resolve this issue of my character here if possible so Ican put this behind me and be done with Gerald1's claims of vague accusations.

Let the roast begin :read:

[warhorse46]

She's about my height and yes, just as pretty in person.


You must be a very small man if you are the same height as Beth. IMO she is prettier in person than on tv.

[warhorse46]

Since it seems that Gerald1 has some serious issues with me and my character and as the policies seem to protect the harasser, I can not post his PM's here.

He has accused me of not being truthful with the posters here. I have asked him for proof of his claims and he has yet to provide any. And I have informed him that I would be happy to answer all his question and claims. I would like to discuss it here, only because he includes all of you in his claims and wanted me to post a public apology and come clean with all of you and I can not really do that in a PM, now can I.

He seems to be to much of a coward so, since integrity is something I refuse to have him or anyone else try to take from me, I thought I would post this here so that i could answer any and all questions and claims here that pertain to any untruths related to any of my prior postings.

Despite my nickname "Spectre", I do not choose to hide in the shadows. If anyone here would like to ask a question or get clarification on something I have stated before, please feel free to ask.

I really look forward to Gerald1's comments most of all. I have asked him to stop contacting me in PM but since he insists on using PM's as a free and protected ride to harass me and he has ignored all my requests, that is why I bring it here.

I want to resolve this issue of my character here if possible so Ican put this behind me and be done with Gerald1's claims of vague accusations.

Let the roast begin :read:

Put Gerald on ignore, that way his PMs to you will never arrive in your inbox. I am absolutely sure you are who you say you are because I verified that with people who know & are not affiliated with this board during the first trial. IMO you have no explaining to do what so ever. If Gerald has a problem with you then it is his to deal with not yours or ours.

[Jayne]

Put Gerald on ignore, that way his PMs to you will never arrive in your inbox. I am absolutely sure you are who you say you are because I verified that with people who know & are not affiliated with this board during the first trial. IMO you have no explaining to do what so ever. If Gerald has a problem with you then it is his to deal with not yours or ours.

DITTO, because I am quite sure as well..and verifying it as well..and GPS knows I "ditto" you (smart lady you are..and PS thanks for the "cat" info on the other thread! OT)..

This all just adds "drama" to the case...and as much as it may be "entertaining" to some, I find it reprehensible (I don't mean you, warhorse..I'm talking about the Subject Matter).

Sometimes many of us feel "backed into the corner"..and some of us "stand up" only to reveal a bit more of themselves..it's what an "attacker" wants...for whatever reason. Despite I or you or anyone has nothing to hide...there is no reason to buy into that "stuff"..it's for their own entertainment or to attempt to divert attention or just "have some fun". Many can be tempted into it..right? check out the threads from Day One....over a year ago. I almost find it sickeningly humorous..or humorously sickening...

But know what? If anyone ever needs any "fodder" to uphold a case/action/claim..they can get it here..and they can get the PMs too, even though one can't post them (rules...respectfully, I abide by them)..but NOTHING anyone puts on their computer or an internet site or anywhere is without repose.

Caveat Emptor applies to Sellers too.. and with the "fine print" that anything that is posted is copyrighted to CourtTV..they can do with it what they wish. (sort of...)

Never post anything you can't back up or that would embarrass your family, children, boss, etc. Because..once it's online...it's essentially "open season"..so much for the poor deer in NJ this time of year!

overly verbose..as usual...

I will go anon...not meaning anonymous..

jmo

Jayne

[GPSpector]

You must be a very small man if you are the same height as Beth. IMO she is prettier in person than on tv.

I'm considered "average" height, not short. How short do you think she is?

[GPSpector]

She smells good too!

I'll take your word for that:shrug:

[Jayne]

?blablablabla changes clothes but erstwhile 'friends' remain the same. Numerous nics are not me and not you and it's great sleuthing with you (Jayne, you in particular:) but I learned and say in parting ~ (Location til after the election) ~ adieu ~

Ah...Hamlet! his mother...

Juliet...to Romeo..whilst the "nurse" calls her hither?

So much for KING's ENGLISH..HUH?

Happen to Love it!

No matter your location..just let's support each other no matter what comes down this election...Oh Woe Is Me?! Ah..Hamlet again... Guess me must need some hamsteak?! vegetarian (for the most part) me be...ah..I'll take a little Obama Steak or is that Stake? Or Omaha Steak?

No matter on which political line you lie...me likes you! :)

Jayne (erstwhile .. sie sind mein freund)

[kennedy06]

I didn't know at first who the woman was on PS arm in the picture. Just had to comment. JMO

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2008-10-20-spector-trial_N.htm?csp=34

[Jayne]

I didn't know at first who the woman was on PS arm in the picture. Just had to comment. JMO

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2008-10-20-spector-trial_N.htm?csp=34

OMG..it's Lady MacBeth....

"Out, damn'd spot! out, I say!—One; two: why, then
'tis time to do't.—Hell is murky.—Fie, my lord, fie, a soldier, and
afeard? What need we fear who knows it, when none can call our
pow'r to accompt?—Yet who would have thought the old man to
have had so much blood in him?"

sorry..it's late at night...

it just seemed sort of "fitting"...like a sword to many villans...

jmo

J

[kennedy06]

OMG..it's Lady MacBeth....

"Out, damn'd spot! out, I say!—One; two: why, then
'tis time to do't.—Hell is murky.—Fie, my lord, fie, a soldier, and
afeard? What need we fear who knows it, when none can call our
pow'r to accompt?—Yet who would have thought the old man to
have had so much blood in him?"

sorry..it's late at night...

it just seemed sort of "fitting"...like a sword to many villans...

jmo

J

:confused: LOL ok, whatever you say! :tongue:

MO

[Jayne]

:confused: LOL ok, whatever you say! :tongue:

MO


uH oH...WHAT DID i DO?

j

[GPSpector]

Well, the Jury has been warned:

http://www.contactmusic.com:80/news.nsf/article/judges%20warning%20to%20spector%20jury_1084129

[hiitsme]

Well, the Jury has been warned:

http://www.contactmusic.com:80/news.nsf/article/judges%20warning%20to%20spector%20jury_1084129

Thanks for that. You're up early!

[Fallen Angel]

i wonder if Tru Tv will even show a live verdict when it comes:(

[Bette08]

Sorry to be joining this late - I just now got the google alert about a jury being chosen and when I didn't see any coverage on TTV or on CNN Crime I came here. I CANNOT believe they are not going to cover the trial. Especially since these days they're running repeats of old trials. I haven't read thru all the posts - but will try to read to see if anyone knows why they wouldn't run it.

I followed every day of the first trial and feel totally cheated not to be able to see the second. Especially to see Alan Jackson work his magic - love that man.

I hate what TTV has become.

[warhorse46]

I'm considered "average" height, not short. How short do you think she is?


I`ll take this to PMs since it is off topic & personal.

[Spectorfan8]

Since it seems that Gerald1 has some serious issues with me and my character and as the policies seem to protect the harasser, I can not post his PM's here.

He has accused me of not being truthful with the posters here. I have asked him for proof of his claims and he has yet to provide any. And I have informed him that I would be happy to answer all his question and claims. I would like to discuss it here, only because he includes all of you in his claims and wanted me to post a public apology and come clean with all of you and I can not really do that in a PM, now can I.

He seems to be to much of a coward so, since integrity is something I refuse to have him or anyone else try to take from me, I thought I would post this here so that i could answer any and all questions and claims here that pertain to any untruths related to any of my prior postings.

Despite my nickname "Spectre", I do not choose to hide in the shadows. If anyone here would like to ask a question or get clarification on something I have stated before, please feel free to ask.

I really look forward to Gerald1's comments most of all. I have asked him to stop contacting me in PM but since he insists on using PM's as a free and protected ride to harass me and he has ignored all my requests, that is why I bring it here.

I want to resolve this issue of my character here if possible so Ican put this behind me and be done with Gerald1's claims of vague accusations.

Let the roast begin :read:

We know who you are, "we" being the ones that really know you and your brother. ;)

[warhorse46]

Well, the Jury has been warned:

http://www.contactmusic.com:80/news.nsf/article/judges%20warning%20to%20spector%20jury_1084129



Wow, 80 jurors seems to be a small pool to me but I trust Judge Fidler's judgement.

[GPSpector]

Thanks for that. You're up early!


Actually, I was just about to go to sleep when I posted :D

[kennedy06]

Well I gave it my best shot today LOL. I was in the area where something was being filmed. I noted who the producer was by his jacket. I thought hmmmm. As I began to leave the area about 3 streets over I happen to notice him talking to two other important looking men and thought here is my chance.

So I yelled over to them is there any chance you can help get Phil Spector murder retrial coverage on KTLA, even KNBC or Cnn's Insession you know the old CTV? He jumpted back and so Woe and laughed and said sorry I can't help you with that one! I tried:D

JMO

[hiitsme]

Well I gave it my best shot today LOL. I was in the area where something was being filmed. I noted who the producer was by his jacket. I thought hmmmm. As I began to leave the area about 3 streets over I happen to notice him talking to two other important looking men and thought here is my chance.

So I yelled over to them is there any chance you can help get Phil Spector murder retrial coverage on KTLA, even KNBC or Cnn's Insession you know the old CTV? He jumpted back and so Woe and laughed and said sorry I can't help you with that one! I tried:D

JMO
Kudos to you. You have been a tireless advocate and great cheerleader. Since it sounds as if you live in the area will you be attending from time to time?

[True2Blues]

Well I gave it my best shot today LOL. I was in the area where something was being filmed. I noted who the producer was by his jacket. I thought hmmmm. As I began to leave the area about 3 streets over I happen to notice him talking to two other important looking men and thought here is my chance.

So I yelled over to them is there any chance you can help get Phil Spector murder retrial coverage on KTLA, even KNBC or Cnn's Insession you know the old CTV? He jumpted back and so Woe and laughed and said sorry I can't help you with that one! I tried:D

JMO

And yet, IS is still running canned trials. Go Figure.

[kennedy06]

Kudos to you. You have been a tireless advocate and great cheerleader. Since it sounds as if you live in the area will you be attending from time to time?

No I don't live to close to LA so, no to attending:(

[True2Blues]

No I don't live to close to LA so, no to attending:(

Well then you'll be free to watch the canned trials on IS. Aren't we all thrilled about that? :cuss:

[GPSpector]

Well, I am glad that whole ordeal is over with. I mean really, how was I going to admit to or deny anything if I did not know what it was that I did or didn't do. Personally, I found the whole thing childish.:shrug: For a former P.I., he was not that good if I had to verify who I was, if that was his big issue.

I would of course like to apologize to everyone for having to deal with this topic.

Now, lets get back on topic.

Has anyone heard any news updates about the Jury?

[KathR]

Well I gave it my best shot today LOL. I was in the area where something was being filmed. I noted who the producer was by his jacket. I thought hmmmm. As I began to leave the area about 3 streets over I happen to notice him talking to two other important looking men and thought here is my chance.

So I yelled over to them is there any chance you can help get Phil Spector murder retrial coverage on KTLA, even KNBC or Cnn's Insession you know the old CTV? He jumpted back and so Woe and laughed and said sorry I can't help you with that one! I tried:D

JMO

LOL. Good for you:)

[KathR]

Well, I am glad that whole ordeal is over with. I mean really, how was I going to admit to or deny anything if I did not know what it was that I did or didn't do. Personally, I found the whole thing childish.:shrug: For a former P.I., he was not that good if I had to verify who I was, if that was his big issue.

I would of course like to apologize to everyone for having to deal with this topic.

Now, lets get back on topic.

Has anyone heard any news updates about the Jury?

Glad you got the problem settled. It's a pleasure having you on this board. You are open minded and interesting.

Wish you were attending the trial and could give us an daily report.

[GPSpector]

Glad you got the problem settled. It's a pleasure having you on this board. You are open minded and interesting.

Wish you were attending the trial and could give us an daily report.

For many reason (some personal), I too wish I could be there. :(

I do not know even if my brothers will be able to attend, as their lives are as unpredictable as mine sometimes.

[True2Blues]

For many reason (some personal), I too wish I could be there. :(

I do not know even if my brothers will be able to attend, as their lives are as unpredictable as mine sometimes.



I'm sorry you aren't able to attend the trial. It's hard since you don't live there. The Judge still thinks it will take 3 months to finish the trial. That's a lot of time to spend in a courtroom for any working person who isn't on the jury or a reporter covering the case, who does live there.

[GPSpector]

I'm sorry you aren't able to attend the trial. It's hard since you don't live there. The Judge still thinks it will take 3 months to finish the trial. That's a lot of time to spend in a courtroom for any working person who isn't on the jury or a reporter covering the case, who does live there.

And it's hard knowing that the fate of my fathers freedom is at the mercy of 12 people and I may not find out until everyone else does not to mention, I may also not know why they voted the way they did by not knowing what evidence was provided to them like in the last trial.

I am grateful that I was able to watch most of last years trial so I can anticipate the outcome or how evidence will be received or viewed but I still would rather not be in the dark, but I guess that's just the way it will be.

[watchu]

GPSpector.... Your father looks very frail. How is his health?

[warhorse46]

And it's hard knowing that the fate of my fathers freedom is at the mercy of 12 people and I may not find out until everyone else does not to mention, I may also not know why they voted the way they did by not knowing what evidence was provided to them like in the last trial.

I am grateful that I was able to watch most of last years trial so I can anticipate the outcome or how evidence will be received or viewed but I still would rather not be in the dark, but I guess that's just the way it will be.



I think the not knowing what is happening, the waiting & wondering is much harder on you than sitting in the courtroom watching the trial. I wish there was a way you could attend too, just for your own peace of mind. Hang in there, you are a strong man.

[coinoutlet]

Sprocket has posted a very complete update on yesterdays jury selection on her blog.

[warhorse46]

Wait, there may be a way. I have :read: where some folks wanted to attend so badly but did not have the financial resources that they tried to borrow money. Some were even willing to sell body fluids. Amazing!! Just shows you if there is a will there is a way. My friend and I may attend in Dec., don't know for sure yet. Have to go now. Voting early starts this week in our area. I am a volunteer and check voter registrations cards against the big book. Be sure and vote.:patriot:


<<<I have :read: where some folks wanted to attend so badly but did not have the financial resources that they tried to borrow money. Some were even willing to sell body fluids. Amazing!!>>
Where is your proof of this statement of fact?

[GPSpector]

GPSpector.... Your father looks very frail. How is his health?

Sorry, I know nothing of his health since he does not keep us updated.

I noticed that his health looked bad during the last trial too but he seemed perfectly healthy (for 67) at the end of the last trial so I do not know if he has health issues or if it's for sympathy.

I of course hope he is as healthy as I think he is.

[True2Blues]

And it's hard knowing that the fate of my fathers freedom is at the mercy of 12 people and I may not find out until everyone else does not to mention, I may also not know why they voted the way they did by not knowing what evidence was provided to them like in the last trial.

I am grateful that I was able to watch most of last years trial so I can anticipate the outcome or how evidence will be received or viewed but I still would rather not be in the dark, but I guess that's just the way it will be.

I can see how difficult that must be for you. Since IS is doing nothing but running canned trials, I see no reason for them not to run this one. Especially since they have been asked repeatedly by viewers to do so. I'm certainly not watching what they've got on.

[Jayne]

I can see how difficult that must be for you. Since IS is doing nothing but running canned trials, I see no reason for them not to run this one. Especially since they have been asked repeatedly by viewers to do so. I'm certainly not watching what they've got on.

ON Paul Heubl's website..on September 26th, he "BLOGGED" that he wanted to cover the PS trial..

http://www.crimefilenews.com/search/label/Spector

"I want to cover the Spector retrial but unless my effort is sponsored or underwritten there is no way I can cover this. I can’t devote myself to traveling to downtown L.A., pay for parking and tell my readers what’s going on. During the first trial I relied on the Internet feeds to bring those Phil Spector trial stories to this blog. "

Then in another "blog entry" he says:

(October 5th entry)

"To avoid the entire process I have taken to filling out jury questionnaires with crayons complete with illustrations of hangman’s nooses. I always get polite notifications excusing me from serving. I think I’d be a great juror but it will never happen in this lifetime.

If you are called for jury duty at any courthouse you will be sent to various courtrooms. You probably will be rejected during the juror audition process until lawyers for both sides don’t view you as a threat to the verdict they are seeking. When you get put into a prospective pool for a specific trial you are going to be given a questionnaire drafted just for that case.

These questionnaires have changed in recent days to include questions about you {NOTE..I'm sure he meant YOUR] Internet habits. You may view this as an outrageous 32 page privacy invasion and you wouldn’t be wrong. Take a look at what they want to know about you if you’re in the Spector jury pool." [Jayne's Interjection...I sort of have to agree...yet...they're not asking for social security numbers or what one does in the privacy of one's bedroom..]

Now..do you/we remember Paul Heubl?

Something about him/his blog..his writing...sounds terribly (and I mean "terribly") familiar. And, I have to say..I like his style of writing..even with the "typos"..after all..we all do make typos now and then.

And, despite that..I might have thrown Heubl a few pence to hang out in LA (where he claims to have business..so why the hotel costs, etc.? Parking et al. is a write off..IF it's business) and cover this trial, even if just from his perspective. But as a True Investigator, I think he'd be Fair in showing both sides?

jmo

J

[True2Blues]

:seeya: Better you than me Jayne!

I wouldn't pay Heubl to do anything but go away. Far, far away. This is the person who had pictures on his web site depicting Judge Fidler as Hitler and wrote such pro-Phil idiocy it was beyond ridiculous. He is one extremely disturbed individual, IMO.

I guess I'll just have to stick with the news reports.

[Jayne]

:seeya: Better you than me Jayne!

I wouldn't pay Heubl to do anything but go away. Far, far away. This is the person who had pictures on his web site depicting Judge Fidler as Hitler and wrote such pro-Phil idiocy it was beyond ridiculous. He is one extremely disturbed individual, IMO.

I guess I'll just have to stick with the news reports.


You got my "point"...and no..not better than me..that's why I said a Pence...like I posted "sounds familiar"..

:)

J

[kennedy06]

ON Paul Heubl's website..on September 26th, he "BLOGGED" that he wanted to cover the PS trial..

http://www.crimefilenews.com/search/label/Spector

"I want to cover the Spector retrial but unless my effort is sponsored or underwritten there is no way I can cover this. I can’t devote myself to traveling to downtown L.A., pay for parking and tell my readers what’s going on. During the first trial I relied on the Internet feeds to bring those Phil Spector trial stories to this blog. "

Then in another "blog entry" he says:

(October 5th entry)

"To avoid the entire process I have taken to filling out jury questionnaires with crayons complete with illustrations of hangman’s nooses. I always get polite notifications excusing me from serving. I think I’d be a great juror but it will never happen in this lifetime.

If you are called for jury duty at any courthouse you will be sent to various courtrooms. You probably will be rejected during the juror audition process until lawyers for both sides don’t view you as a threat to the verdict they are seeking. When you get put into a prospective pool for a specific trial you are going to be given a questionnaire drafted just for that case.

These questionnaires have changed in recent days to include questions about you {NOTE..I'm sure he meant YOUR] Internet habits. You may view this as an outrageous 32 page privacy invasion and you wouldn’t be wrong. Take a look at what they want to know about you if you’re in the Spector jury pool." [Jayne's Interjection...I sort of have to agree...yet...they're not asking for social security numbers or what one does in the privacy of one's bedroom..]

Now..do you/we remember Paul Heubl?

Something about him/his blog..his writing...sounds terribly (and I mean "terribly") familiar. And, I have to say..I like his style of writing..even with the "typos"..after all..we all do make typos now and then.

And, despite that..I might have thrown Heubl a few pence to hang out in LA (where he claims to have business..so why the hotel costs, etc.? Parking et al. is a write off..IF it's business) and cover this trial, even if just from his perspective. But as a True Investigator, I think he'd be Fair in showing both sides?

jmo

J

Paul Who??? Wasn't he that guy that posted the picture of the NAZI judge on the Team Spector board last year? That guy? He needs to be sponsored to pay for parking? Are you kidding me. IIRC someone mentioned he was a former Shy Town police officer and now you post he uses crayon to Phil out jury quesionaires???

Jayne I hope he could be impartial if he blogged about it but it sounds like he wants someone to subsidize his parking expense to attend the trial (Maybe Phil would??) and if he supports PS enough to post a picture of a Nazi on PS TS myspace last year, he may not be able to be objective in his writings. :shrug:

JMO

Sorry True I didn't see you had already mentioned his posting the Nazi judge picture. Just not something the average American sees everyday so it did stand out to me when I peaked over there during the TS evil judge comment that day YIKES on that one also JMO

[Jayne]

Paul Who??? Wasn't he that guy that posted the picture of the NAZI judge on the Team Spector board last year? That guy? He needs to be sponsored to pay for parking? Are you kidding me. IIRC someone mentioned he was a former Shy Town police officer and now you post he uses crayon to Phil out jury quesionaires???

Jayne I hope he could be impartial if he blogged about it but it sounds like he wants someone to subsidize his parking expense to attend the trial (Maybe Phil would??) and if he supports PS enough to post a picture of a Nazi on PS TS myspace last year, he may not be able to be objective in his writings. :shrug:

JMO

Sorry True I didn't see you had already mentioned his posting the Nazi judge picture. Just not something the average American sees everyday so it did stand out to me when I peaked over there during the TS evil judge comment that day YIKES on that one also JMO

HEY..I got a discussion going, didn't I?

:)

Jayne

[True2Blues]

Paul Who??? Wasn't he that guy that posted the picture of the NAZI judge on the Team Spector board last year? That guy? He needs to be sponsored to pay for parking? Are you kidding me. IIRC someone mentioned he was a former Shy Town police officer and now you post he uses crayon to Phil out jury quesionaires???

Jayne I hope he could be impartial if he blogged about it but it sounds like he wants someone to subsidize his parking expense to attend the trial (Maybe Phil would??) and if he supports PS enough to post a picture of a Nazi on PS TS myspace last year, he may not be able to be objective in his writings. :shrug:

JMO

Sorry True I didn't see you had already mentioned his posting the Nazi judge picture. Just not something the average American sees everyday so it did stand out to me when I peaked over there during the TS evil judge comment that day YIKES on that one also JMO

I'm glad I'm not the only one who remembers that! I think Judge Fidler is an excellent Judge and going that far with the fanatical imagery just shows how impossible it is for that one to be impartial.

[True2Blues]

HEY..I got a discussion going, didn't I?

:)

Jayne

It did that! I'm not sure I'd sent him to an ally though! LOL Did you see the sight where he writes the same garbage, but has pictures of himself in drag and a female name? Whatever makes his day, but since it's all the same rhetoric I don't see why he bothers. Besides, it doesn't work for him. I've seen men who look good as women, but he isn't one of them.

[True2Blues]

You got my "point"...and no..not better than me..that's why I said a Pence...like I posted "sounds familiar"..

:)

J

What's the currency in China equal to a pence? A Yuan or something like that? Maybe just give him a bucket of fish and send him to the South Pole. Naw, I like penguins.

[Jayne]

What's the currency in China equal to a pence? A Yuan or something like that? Maybe just give him a bucket of fish and send him to the South Pole. Naw, I like penguins.

Dunno about China or anywhere else..but a pence is essentially a penny..less than the Two Cents, I'd give towards parking. People who want to attend the trial and not get paid for filiming it or blogging about it still pay their pretty Pence(s) to park.

HAHA...his suits couldn't equal..none could..those cute little tuxedo bearing lovely animals/birds. Love em'!

Ah...but what if...the Penguin of Batman Lore? DeVito...Now...I could take him as a defense attorney..wouldn't that be amusing?! He'd use his Umbrella to explain the lack of blood spatter? (Sorry...my sick humour)

[Jayne]

It did that! I'm not sure I'd sent him to an ally though! LOL Did you see the sight where he writes the same garbage, but has pictures of himself in drag and a female name? Whatever makes his day, but since it's all the same rhetoric I don't see why he bothers. Besides, it doesn't work for him. I've seen men who look good as women, but he isn't one of them.

I was almost married to one! (JUST KIDDING!) Shoot I look better as a man...well..Just Kidding?!?

I'm waiting for the poster here to "support" ol Paul...or sound like him?

IMO.he's a sell out...he talks defense..and rightfully so, I guess from his experience having been a cop...and done the "right thing" but for a few things..or figuring out how to do the Wrong thing..this is where he stands? He's like the kid who becomes a prosecutor to get the experience (NOTHING wrong with that, mind you) then turns to the opposite side and can do it WELL..from that "other side experience".

However..I'l spell check and fine tooth comb my website and bloggings if I wanted to be taken seriously.. Cops are notarious for horrible spellings..poor English usage, etc. but they are a league of their own and I have always respected them as long as they are TRUE. I'd correct their poor English and police reports for them.

You don't put up a website..claiming what you do and have such obvious "typos" unless you want to pass the buck to your secretary?

We can all make mistakes..but if you want to be taken seriously and with a high level of professionalism...you do not use "you" instead of "your or yours" (now I sound like another poster..sorry!)

J

[GPSpector]

I can see how difficult that must be for you. Since IS is doing nothing but running canned trials, I see no reason for them not to run this one. Especially since they have been asked repeatedly by viewers to do so. I'm certainly not watching what they've got on.

Gee, I thought they were covering the Britney Spears Out of State Drivers Licence trial case. Doesn't that sound more exciting then this one?

Of course, not for me.

[GPSpector]

I was almost married to one! (JUST KIDDING!) Shoot I look better as a man...well..Just Kidding?!?

I'm waiting for the poster here to "support" ol Paul...or sound like him?

IMO.he's a sell out...he talks defense..and rightfully so, I guess from his experience having been a cop...and done the "right thing" but for a few things..or figuring out how to do the Wrong thing..this is where he stands? He's like the kid who becomes a prosecutor to get the experience (NOTHING wrong with that, mind you) then turns to the opposite side and can do it WELL..from that "other side experience".

However..I'l spell check and fine tooth comb my website and bloggings if I wanted to be taken seriously.. Cops are notarious for horrible spellings..poor English usage, etc. but they are a league of their own and I have always respected them as long as they are TRUE. I'd correct their poor English and police reports for them.

You don't put up a website..claiming what you do and have such obvious "typos" unless you want to pass the buck to your secretary?

We can all make mistakes..but if you want to be taken seriously and with a high level of professionalism...you do not use "you" instead of "your or yours" (now I sound like another poster..sorry!)

J


Hmm, I think the Poster that would support him is not here anymore.:shrug:

[NYGalPal]

Hmm, I think the Poster that would support him is not here anymore.:shrug:

I beg to differ, he just switched nics.

Jayne, you were a cop as well? How many professions have you had and why not anymore?

[kennedy06]

HEY..I got a discussion going, didn't I?

:)

Jayne

I guess you did at that! Needless to say from my many typos from last nights post, you can tell I was just shocked by what I had read. I would like to read more about the trial.Then to read I could possibly read the same information from a man in drag also:shrug: To each their own in their life choices, everyone needs to be free to truly express their true inner spirit. I guess if PS can wear his wigs and things his supporters can be free to do the same. Thanks for the information Jayne, it was quite enlightening. I guess the wall of sound survives but the 60s are truly gone.:(

JMO

[kennedy06]

Thanks for the link Tartangirl. I do recall that being mentioned but it never aired back when we first heard about it. I do hope we (I) can view it somehow. If anyone else does I hope they can let us in on it:)

Just as a side note, I look forward to posting with everyone no matter what their views on the evidence. I know we can all do it in a civil and respectful manner.:patriot:

Has anyone heard anything interesting about the jury selection?

JMO

[True2Blues]

Gee, I thought they were covering the Britney Spears Out of State Drivers Licence trial case. Doesn't that sound more exciting then this one?

Of course, not for me.

Here I thought there was nothing worse than canned trials. Blech.

[warhorse46]

:I did not post what I :read: as a "statement of fact?" I just found it amazing, as I recall reading, to what lenghts some people are willing to go. It could even be a part of some kind of con game. Like a person saying they are going to have to do something desperate, but not really do it just so someone will send the $. Could it be possible? I do not know. I find human nature and what people are willing to do interesting. Don't you? I think you must or you would not be on this message board. For me it's like trying to analyze both sides of the Phil Spector case. Got to go. early election poll duties again. I get to drive the van today and pick up the handicapped and shut-in's. Early voting is a great idea IMO.:patriot:



Nice tap dance to avoid answering the question. Your avoidance speaks volumes, as do your poorly veiled innuendos. IMO you are not here to discuss the Phil Spector case as evidenced by your posts.

[GPSpector]

Here I thought there was nothing worse than canned trials. Blech.

I guess you're right :lol::D

[GPSpector]

ON Paul Heubl's website..on September 26th, he "BLOGGED" that he wanted to cover the PS trial..

http://www.crimefilenews.com/search/label/Spector

"I want to cover the Spector retrial but unless my effort is sponsored or underwritten there is no way I can cover this. I can’t devote myself to traveling to downtown L.A., pay for parking and tell my readers what’s going on. During the first trial I relied on the Internet feeds to bring those Phil Spector trial stories to this blog. "



Now there's some classy begging if ever I saw it. At least I have never asked for money or help to get me there. In FACT, some of you may remember that last year, I declined offers of help from here.

I think anyone that can post Sarah Palin on their webpage as "The new love of his life" is about as twisted as they come. she just does not pass the personality test. I prefer people of a higher character and better morals then she's proving to have.

[GPSpector]

Nice tap dance to avoid answering the question. Your avoidance speaks volumes, as do your poorly veiled innuendos. IMO you are not here to discuss the Phil Spector case as evidenced by your posts.

I guess then, it's a fact that he did not read what he is claiming to have read :confused:

[True2Blues]

I guess then, it's a fact that he did not read what he is claiming to have read :confused:


No big surprise there.

Well, a Jury is seated, 7 mes, 5 women and openings expected next week. Still time to get a camera and some sound into the courtroom and can the canned trials.

Not that it will happen, just sayin'.

http://abclocal.go.com/kabc/story?section=news/entertainment&id=6466435

[True2Blues]

Now there's some classy begging if ever I saw it. At least I have never asked for money or help to get me there. In FACT, some of you may remember that last year, I declined offers of help from here.

I think anyone that can post Sarah Palin on their webpage as "The new love of his life" is about as twisted as they come. she just does not pass the personality test. I prefer people of a higher character and better morals then she's proving to have.

Heubl is a piece of work, isn't he? Not someone anyone would want fanatically devoted to them IMO.

[GPSpector]

Heubl is a piece of work, isn't he? Not someone anyone would want fanatically devoted to them IMO.

Gee, I can't imagine anyone as twisted and devoted like him following me around... oh wait, yes I can :rolleyes:

[GPSpector]

No big surprise there.

Well, a Jury is seated, 7 mes, 5 women and openings expected next week. Still time to get a camera and some sound into the courtroom and can the canned trials.

Not that it will happen, just sayin'.

http://abclocal.go.com/kabc/story?section=news/entertainment&id=6466435

Well, I can honestly say that they both look better in that picture and as long as there are no additional news articles created on the side (like tantrums in the Court), all should go well and both sides should see fair Justice with a smooth running trial.:read:

[bearwds]

JUST ISSUED BY MSNBC IN A NEWS "CRAWL"..........


"A Jury For The Phil Spector Trial Has Been Selected And Seated"


...only Info I have.


bearwds

[GPSpector]

JUST ISSUED BY MSNBC IN A NEWS "CRAWL"..........


"A Jury For The Phil Spector Trial Has Been Selected And Seated"


...only Info I have.


bearwds

It would seem ABC is a bit faster then NBC :D There's a link to an ABC article in message 522

[bearwds]

It would seem ABC is a bit faster then NBC :D There's a link to an ABC article in message 522

*******************************

Really..??? ABC beat them out huh..?? <watching Chris Mathews>

Ok....you see this headline...does it give you an immediate feeling..??


bearwds

[kennedy06]

*******************************

Really..??? ABC beat them out huh..?? <watching Chris Mathews>

Ok....you see this headline...does it give you an immediate feeling..??


bearwds

It does me! My immediate feeling is the media is interested! :D

OK crawlers on the screen that is a start!

[kennedy06]

Dave posted a new link on the links thread. It tells us about some of the jurors selected. I must say I do find the social worker that was once assigned to a psych ward, an interesting pick. JMO

[kennedy06]

GP, just out of curiosity is there any significance that you may know of for the dragonfly pin we seem to see PS wear often in the photos ?

JMO

[True2Blues]

Gee, I can't imagine anyone as twisted and devoted like him following me around... oh wait, yes I can :rolleyes:

I'm sorry to hear about that. That's just downright scary. I hope everything is okay.

[True2Blues]

Dave posted a new link on the links thread. It tells us about some of the jurors selected. I must say I do find the social worker that was once assigned to a psych ward, an interesting pick. JMO

It would be interesting to hear her thoughts as she observes PS.

[True2Blues]

It does me! My immediate feeling is the media is interested! :D

OK crawlers on the screen that is a start!

Really! Trials go on everyday all over the country, yet they don't all get crawlers and headlines. If no one is interested, why bother?

[Spectorfan8]

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-spector24-2008oct24,0,3572266.story

This was on the links thread, just thought I would bring it over for some FYI.

Peace,

SF8

[Jayne]

Thanks...SF8

I'm not so sure it was Romantic...yet I think it might be..what many would call "romantic"..but is essentially "you do this for me..and I'll do that for you" sort of thing. It's not romantic..it's using another person's perception that it's a "nice place to be..maybe the Cast's Couch"..but it turns out "wrong". It's a "threat" as I'd categorize it...
IF it is in fact true...which I wouldn't doubt. You want the job..or the recommendation..you DO whatever you need to do..even if it's "playing with a gun"..OK..that's a bit out there..but I wouldn't doubt it...what I don't know about PS..but can figure out from others in his position..of POWER..and he can MAKE IT HAPPEN.

This is ALL speculation..but I wouldn't doubt for a moment that PS put this up to LanA...IT'S networking...get what you can..and run with it IF YOU CAN. But because she refused his "contract", he was ticked..and so..came the usual...but this time..it went too far..others had their cars and fled...or they weren't really in the same position at Christmas parties and such..here was LC..with "no way out"..


Men (sorry you guys)..do this as a matter of fact or circumstance: sleep with me or else...Ogden comes to mind. Innocent..SURE..if you haven't caused or enabled the death of someone else..II suppose women can do it too.but just reverse the situations/circumstances)

I would comment more..but it isn't necessary or accepted.


Sorry...seen too much of it, I guess.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-spector24-2008oct24,0,3572266.story

This was on the links thread, just thought I would bring it over for some FYI.

Peace,

SF8

[GPSpector]

GP, just out of curiosity is there any significance that you may know of for the dragonfly pin we seem to see PS wear often in the photos ?

JMO

Maybe being worn for Rachelle :shrug: I've never known him to be facinated with any bugs. I know he is scared of mice :D

[GPSpector]

I'm sorry to hear about that. That's just downright scary. I hope everything is okay.

Well, as long as he stays out of my PM's I'm fine. ;)

[nsm]

does anyone know if CTV will cover it on any level? Will they give updates or recaps of the days trial? Why they decided to NOT televise it is beyond my comprehension.

[GPSpector]

Thanks...SF8

I'm not so sure it was Romantic...yet I think it might be..what many would call "romantic"..but is essentially "you do this for me..and I'll do that for you" sort of thing. It's not romantic..it's using another person's perception that it's a "nice place to be..maybe the Cast's Couch"..but it turns out "wrong". It's a "threat" as I'd categorize it...
IF it is in fact true...which I wouldn't doubt. You want the job..or the recommendation..you DO whatever you need to do..even if it's "playing with a gun"..OK..that's a bit out there..but I wouldn't doubt it...what I don't know about PS..but can figure out from others in his position..of POWER..and he can MAKE IT HAPPEN.

This is ALL speculation..but I wouldn't doubt for a moment that PS put this up to LanA...IT'S networking...get what you can..and run with it IF YOU CAN. But because she refused his "contract", he was ticked..and so..came the usual...but this time..it went too far..others had their cars and fled...or they weren't really in the same position at Christmas parties and such..here was LC..with "no way out"..


Men (sorry you guys)..do this as a matter of fact or circumstance: sleep with me or else...Ogden comes to mind. Innocent..SURE..if you haven't caused or enabled the death of someone else..II suppose women can do it too.but just reverse the situations/circumstances)

I would comment more..but it isn't necessary or accepted.


Sorry...seen too much of it, I guess.

The only problem I have with it is that my father is/was in music. He would have very little to offer an actress. He never made a video that I am aware of (though I did suggest that he should way back when DVD's 1st came out in the 80's). I still wish he would make DVD video releases of his music with the original footage of the groups.

[Juror #9]

JUST ISSUED BY MSNBC IN A NEWS "CRAWL"..........


"A Jury For The Phil Spector Trial Has Been Selected And Seated"


...only Info I have.


bearwds

It's about time!!!

[kennedy06]

It's about time!!!

Well look who stopped by! Did the announcement bring back a few memories?

JMO:)

[Juror #9]

It sure did.

[kennedy06]

It sure did.

Well I hope you will stop by again when more of our posters are online I'm sure they would like to post to you!

If you can answer or would like to, have you been able to keep in touch with any of the former jurors? Of course no numbers or names needed :)

Thank you

JMO

[warhorse46]

Your post,"Where is your proof of this statement of fact?" My answer, "I did not post what I :read: as a "statement of fact?" I just found it amazing, as I recall reading, to what lenghts some people are willing to go." No name, quotes or source mentioned. If you some how by use of tortured logic deduce that as avoidance, well then have at it. As to "veiled innuendos." since no one specfically is mentioned I won't even go there. You are also wrong about "IMO you are not here to discuss the Phil Spector case as evidenced by your posts". Need I remind you that you felt compelled to jump in on another post and saw fit to challenge. You then proceeded to drag it on. Case closed, enough said about that. Now, do you have ? for me about the PS2. I will be more than happy to respond as best I can. Thank you.:patriot:
__________________


Sure, what is your opinion about the seated jury. BTW, you waste your time & energy sending me PMs, they are ignored.

[warhorse46]

does anyone know if CTV will cover it on any level? Will they give updates or recaps of the days trial? Why they decided to NOT televise it is beyond my comprehension.



From what I have been reading CTV does not have any reporter @ the trial.

[warhorse46]

No big surprise there.

Well, a Jury is seated, 7 mes, 5 women and openings expected next week. Still time to get a camera and some sound into the courtroom and can the canned trials.

Not that it will happen, just sayin'.

http://abclocal.go.com/kabc/story?section=news/entertainment&id=6466435


Good news, now the trial can get into the meat of the case. Go get 'em AJ!

[Juror #9]

He'll go down this time.

[bearwds]

It's about time!!!

****************************

Welcome back #9..!! How the heck are you..?? Has having been on the jury affected you at all over the past year..??

Looked over the current jury list...and NO Dan-10...lol


bearwds

[Juror #9]

no post jury effects. Just went back to my life.

[warhorse46]

Two jurors showed AJ and LF who has the power! :lol:

Phil will never be convicted. It won't happen, Warhorse. Start selling crying towels to guiltys! Donate a couple to AJ and LF! :D

mho


Another one to add to your list of wrongly tried defendants, eh? Different jury this time.

[GPSpector]

no post jury effects. Just went back to my life.

You are so lucky you could.:(

[Ellie]

The only problem I have with it is that my father is/was in music. He would have very little to offer an actress. He never made a video that I am aware of (though I did suggest that he should way back when DVD's 1st came out in the 80's). I still wish he would make DVD video releases of his music with the original footage of the groups.

I think this would be a great idea. The only thing I would wonder is, well as far as royalties... wouldn't he have to pay the artists a percentage? And we all know how he feels about that kind of thing. Otherwise I really think that would be a great 'final word' from good ol' PS.

(Gary...dude, do you ever sleep? ;)

[Ellie]

Two jurors showed AJ and LF who has the power! :lol:

Phil will never be convicted. It won't happen, Warhorse. Start selling crying towels to guiltys! Donate a couple to AJ and LF! :D

mho

Well.... part of me thinks you might (unfortunately) be right... but at the very least he'll go broke paying for his defense and the money he'll have to shell out after the civil trial. And we all know how much Phil likes to pay his bills..... :rolleyes:

WAIT. I'm editing this. I think you're as wrong as wrong can be. He will be found guilty this time. I am sure of it.

[llylabrat]

Wasnt it Fidler who told the first jury that there wasn't any new evidence & no other jury would be more qualified than them to reach a verdict? "Nothing new" is the reason IMO no one is carrying the retrial. It would be like a re-run. I think they are underestimating how many people would really watch and therefore see their stupid advertisers commercials.

[Spectorfan8]

He'll go down this time.


That is not a given. He has the same chance as he had the last time. Not trying to start trouble, but he could have the same result as last time. jmo

[hiitsme]

Wasnt it Fidler who told the first jury that there wasn't any new evidence & no other jury would be more qualified than them to reach a verdict? "Nothing new" is the reason IMO no one is carrying the retrial. It would be like a re-run. I think they are underestimating how many people would really watch and therefore see their stupid advertisers commercials.

There probably won't be any new bombshell type of evidence. For me, the cast of characters, particularly the defense team and their witnesses were entertaining, given the seriousness of the case. Now with new defense attorneys and probably new ''expert" witnesses, it could be quite a different trial, one of which many of us would like to see!

[kennedy06]

There probably won't be any new bombshell type of evidence. For me, the cast of characters, particularly the defense team and their witnesses were entertaining, given the seriousness of the case. Now with new defense attorneys and probably new ''expert" witnesses, it could be quite a different trial, one of which many of us would like to see!

Thats the way I look at it. Not an just a an ordinary retrial but, with new attorneys on both sides (AJ & DR remaining from PS1) you never know how the evidence might be presented this time. The way they might tweak their presentations or cross examinations that could make this trial even more intreresting than the first. JMO

[Spectorfan8]

Thats the way I look at it. Not an just a an ordinary retrial but, with new attorneys on both sides (AJ & DR remaining from PS1) you never know how the evidence might be presented this time. The way they might tweak their presentations or cross examinations that could make this trial even more intreresting than the first. JMO

I think you are right. This trial could be more interesting than the last one.jmo

[gnm109]

For all of the reasons mentioned above, PSII could certainly be a more interesting trial than PSI. For one thing, there was something that didn't feel right about Mrs. Badin, Esq. and her expert husband being in the same trial, even admiring and respecting them as I do. Perhaps it's not a conflict of interest but it looked strange. Who knows what the effect of that really was?

I think if the correct verdict were to be found, it would be something along the lines of Voluntary manslaugjhter. While it is likely that the prosecution will charge murder, to leave out the manslaughter element makes it an "all or nothing" case for the jury and that often leads to a mistrial.

Like the rest of the posters here, I'm truly surprised that TRUTV won't be covering it. It simply makes no sense. I sure wish they would bring back the old days of Court TV with some of the great legal commentators that they used to have. It's sad the way they have changed. I truly enjoyed the former "gavel to gavel' coverage with the former announcers. They made you feel like you were there and were a part of the circumstances, "a fly on the wall", as it were. I don;t get that feeling anymore.

A classic example of an almost perfect trial coverage was New Mexico vs. Posey. I watched almost every minute of that trial. Surely if the TV game is all about ratings, I think PSII would be right up at the top. It has everything - an aging roue of a defendant with strange quirks, a lovely, innocent victim and lots and lots of prior bad acts by Mr. S. What's not to like.....or for that matter, what's not to watch?

I guess I'll read about it in the local newspaper, that is, if it's still in business when the trial is over.

:read:

[warhorse46]

There probably won't be any new bombshell type of evidence. For me, the cast of characters, particularly the defense team and their witnesses were entertaining, given the seriousness of the case. Now with new defense attorneys and probably new ''expert" witnesses, it could be quite a different trial, one of which many of us would like to see!


I know in the past CTV has said they don't show many retrials because the evidence has all been heard before & they felt it would not be interesting for viewers to rehear it.

[warhorse46]

Hey, I heard that song before when I said he would never be convicted in the first trial.:lol: He will not be convicted. Incorrect! I didn't say Phil was wrongly tried. I said he would not be convicted!

Scott Peterson and O. J Simpson were wrongly tried.


mho


Same old song & dance. Talk about uninteresting repeats! As I previously stated, this is a different jury so this trial may come to a different conclusion. We will just have to wait & see how it unfolds.

[warhorse46]

For all of the reasons mentioned above, PSII could certainly be a more interesting trial than PSI. For one thing, there was something that didn't feel right about Mrs. Badin, Esq. and her expert husband being in the same trial, even admiring and respecting them as I do. Perhaps it's not a conflict of interest but it looked strange. Who knows what the effect of that really was?

I think if the correct verdict were to be found, it would be something along the lines of Voluntary manslaugjhter. While it is likely that the prosecution will charge murder, to leave out the manslaughter element makes it an "all or nothing" case for the jury and that often leads to a mistrial.

Like the rest of the posters here, I'm truly surprised that TRUTV won't be covering it. It simply makes no sense. I sure wish they would bring back the old days of Court TV with some of the great legal commentators that they used to have. It's sad the way they have changed. I truly enjoyed the former "gavel to gavel' coverage with the former announcers. They made you feel like you were there and were a part of the circumstances, "a fly on the wall", as it were. I don;t get that feeling anymore.

A classic example of an almost perfect trial coverage was New Mexico vs. Posey. I watched almost every minute of that trial. Surely if the TV game is all about ratings, I think PSII would be right up at the top. It has everything - an aging roue of a defendant with strange quirks, a lovely, innocent victim and lots and lots of prior bad acts by Mr. S. What's not to like.....or for that matter, what's not to watch?

I guess I'll read about it in the local newspaper, that is, if it's still in business when the trial is over.

:read:


I agree with all you have said here. I too do not like the path that TruTV has chosen, moving away from gavel to gavel live trial coverage.

[NYGalPal]

Jury picked for Phil Spector murder retrial
A jury has been selected for Phil Spector's murder retrial with opening arguments in the long-awaited case set to start next Wednesday.

By Catherine Elsworth in Los Angeles and agencies
Last Updated: 4:00AM BST 24 Oct 2008

A panel of seven men and five women was selected on Thursday, more than a year after the legendary producer's first trial ended in jury deadlock and a mistrial.

The eccentric recluse, who pioneered the symphonic Wall of Sound recording technique in the 1960s, is accused of shooting dead struggling actress and nightclub hostess Lana Clarkson at his Los Angeles mansion in February 2003.

Prosecutors allege the 68-year-old killed the 40-year-old blonde with a single gunshot to the mouth in the early hours of the morning as she tried to leave his home. Clarkson, whose acting career had stalled at the time of her death, is known most for her role in the 1985 Roger Corman cult classic The Barbarian Queen.


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/celebritynews/3250132/Jury-picked-for-Phil-Spector-murder-retrial.html

[NYGalPal]

Lana's family are going to file a civil suit against him. Good for them. Do you think he'll plead the 5th like Scott Peterson plans on doing? That is what guilty people do, not the innocent.

imo

[Jayne]

I agree with you. Is Voluntary Manslaughter a choice in this trial? Its the charge that makes sense to me. The way PS has played around with guns in the past - without killing anyone- it doesn't seem to me that he intended murder. I think he just screwed up this time - and he did kill her...... as in "I think I just killed someone".

and I agree with gnm and you too...(In my former State..we call it Reckless Endangerment..VM "knowingly" in a sense..not like involuntary..no intent or true "accident"...)

Riordan vehemently opposed an instruction to the jury about VM...and I questioned back then and still do why the prosecution didn't include at least in their presentation of the case the "option"..let alone pleading it as another "count". but, I think they wanted to go for All or Nothing. In another state I have experience in..VM would be included in the initial charge..it wouldn't lessen the going for Murder but it's like a "backup"...and even if not included in the Complaint/Charge, as long as the elements were proved, the jury could come back with VM or an "LIO" even if they didn't find Murder..malice or otherwise..that state had different statutes than CA..as to degrees for M1 and M2, etc. They'd have even included "kidnapping" But..I must say..under the circumstances of PS's case, it's circumstantial just like it all is since there is no Actual Witness other than PS himself..and AS as an "outside but there" witness.

They are going to risk double jeopardy, imo, if they lose on the M2 charge...they can't come back for VM, as I see it momentarily..gnm has more experience from the defense side and could comment on that. I can't second guess the LA DA at all..but I'd be including VM either on the pleading or in the presentation of facts and argument.

And, I do think there was more of a chance at VM last time...and I think Riordan did too, hence his Telephone Arguments against it.

jmo

J

[NYGalPal]

I agree with you. Is Voluntary Manslaughter a choice in this trial? Its the charge that makes sense to me. The way PS has played around with guns in the past - without killing anyone- it doesn't seem to me that he intended murder. I think he just screwed up this time - and he did kill her...... as in "I think I just killed someone".

I think he intended on murder because Lana must have rejected Phil sexually. His past offenses against woman were because they said "no". Don't forget he moved Lana after he shot her. He placed her in a chair in an attempt to cover up his crime.

May he never see the light of day after his is finally convicted.

[Jayne]

I think he intended on murder because Lana must have rejected Phil sexually. His past offenses against woman were because they said "no". Don't forget he moved Lana after he shot her. He placed her in a chair in an attempt to cover up his crime.

May he never see the light of day after his is finally convicted.

I get your points and I agree with you..for the most part..but I don't see anyway that PS placed her in that chair..but maybe he did.

I don't think he placed her purse on her shoulder..it would have been too late to get the pool of blood running from the right side of her head into that purse. And, I'm pretty convinced that she wasn't standing or crouching with that purse on her shoulder to accept that blood purging into it before he placed her in that chair. There'd have been more of a mess of droppings, etc. to get her backed up into that chair with the purse so placed..IF he placed her there.

I think he either backed her into that chair..or she was sitting there..waiting for the "driver"..or just was tired and waiting for PS to "exit her out the door"..

I still do think..and it's only thinking..but the actress she was and the genre of her acting..she'd have been Standing if she wanted to Off herself...and she'd have done it right in front of PS..and there'd be a lot more blood on him..and she'd have been lying on the floor..or if he dragged her body to the chair..there'd be evidence of it..and his Jacket would be down the garbage disposal or burned in the fireplace.

And, had she fallen on the floor..or if he placed her there..there would be other trauma to her head..like falling on the floor and hitting the "pavement"..

I think PS was in his "usual mode"..and he played his game..but this time it went wrong..VM at the least. M2...well..needs to be proven as to the malice..and maybe they'll do it (prosecution)..but I'd be crossing my t's and dotting my "i's"...

PS IMO is a horrible person.. a blithe on society as to his goings about..but I do not think he intentionally set off to kill Lana..and as much as I'd be going Gung Ho for M2, I'd include the VM as a real and probably the best possibility for a conviction.

jmo

J

[Jayne]

That is not a given. He has the same chance as he had the last time. Not trying to start trouble, but he could have the same result as last time. jmo

I agree..that he does..and you are not starting trouble!

However..if the prosecution fashions their case to include that VM..it may be the result that is correct?

If not..ITA with you..it could be another hung jury...and we'll have to watch them with helicopters overhead with the humping and bumping..to being "let loose" from a crime..that he commited..but wasn't charged or deliberated. and.then it's over. cept..that Chelle may be moving on.her "job" is over?

JMO

J

[warhorse46]

I agree with you. Is Voluntary Manslaughter a choice in this trial? Its the charge that makes sense to me. The way PS has played around with guns in the past - without killing anyone- it doesn't seem to me that he intended murder. I think he just screwed up this time - and he did kill her...... as in "I think I just killed someone".



Lesser included charges are not inserted until the conclusion of the evidence part of the trial. The Judge includes them if he/she feels the evidence supports the charge. Either side may request lessers but it is ultimately up to the Judge.

[Jayne]

Lesser included charges are not inserted until the conclusion of the evidence part of the trial. The Judge includes them if he/she feels the evidence supports the charge. Either side may request lessers but it is ultimately up to the Judge.

You are so SMART and so RIGHT ON.depending on the state and the pleadings.

This Judge this time..is either going to impress that the sides prove their case..including the LIOS..and if they refuse to do that..he will stick by the law. And ..rightfully so..he is an HONEST JUDGE..

Shame on them..if they don't try..There is NO way..that VM can't be included..depending..as I've said ad nauseum...but I fear that the DA in LA is going only for the jugular..and may regret it..if not presented in the alternate fashion.

For the little I know...Why didn't PS listen to his first attorney Shapro?...MONIES later...more publicity...truth is...he'll die in his castle or in prison...I think...and his children and Lana's family will be bereft.. WHY? because he still got to live in his castle...and when it all comes down..if it does...there is no loss to him...sort of.

We may forever "love" his music..but there will be a smear/scourge on everything he's done.

jmo

J

[Ellie]

Correct. Same old song and dance. Talk about uninteresting repeats. As I have previously stated Phil will not be convicted. It won't happen, IMO.

MHO

Well your posts sure are fun and interesting to read, just full of usefull information and well-thought-out comments.

[True2Blues]

I know in the past CTV has said they don't show many retrials because the evidence has all been heard before & they felt it would not be interesting for viewers to rehear it.

Gotta love that. Especially since they have run their canned trials more than once, including the one they were running when I flipped by today. I've seen that defendant's testimony before.

A live murder trail isn't good enough, because it's a retrial though. How foolish is that?

New Attorneys, New Jury, vs. rerunning canned trials, ooh, that's a real poser of a choice. NOT!

[True2Blues]

Imo given the specious justifications for some of his rulings. JF is capable of anything as long as it helps the prosecution:(. The "phantom white nail" testimony is a good example of his bias IMO. The only thing certain about JF is that he will go to any length to help them and try to protect his record on appeal at the same time.JMO:seeya:

What 'phantom white nail' testimony is that? I know a statement was given to the jury at the last trial, stating that HL found something that wasn't handed over to the police, so it could be identified.

All of the testimony I saw regarding the object itself, including photos of it and HL's notes about it, crammed into a space in his notes in different colored ink, was in the Evidentiary Hearing. That was held outside of the jury view.

[GPSpector]

Gotta love that. Especially since they have run their canned trials more than once, including the one they were running when I flipped by today. I've seen that defendant's testimony before.

A live murder trail isn't good enough, because it's a retrial though. How foolish is that?

New Attorneys, New Jury, vs. rerunning canned trials, ooh, that's a real poser of a choice. NOT!

I do agree with you. Even if I did not have a vested interest, you'd still be correct. ;)

[gnm109]

Lana's family are going to file a civil suit against him. Good for them. Do you think he'll plead the 5th like Scott Peterson plans on doing? That is what guilty people do, not the innocent.

imo

It's not correct to say that people use the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution if they are guilty. There are other reasons why a person might do this.

In fact, when a person pleads the Fifth Amendment, it's reversible error for the prosecutor to make a statement to the jury at any time during the trial that because of pleading the Fifth Amendment a defendant is guilty or suspect.

In any case, it's something that any defendant has the right to plead. It is a Constitutional Protection that was added to the original document with the Bill of Rights in 1789 and for good reason. The new Americans didn't want to have the old English law wherein a person could be tortured until they gave up information wanted by the state.

Surely you must know this..............................:confused:

[Jayne]

Imo given the specious justifications for some of his rulings. JF is capable of anything as long as it helps the prosecution:(. The "phantom white nail" testimony is a good example of his bias IMO. The only thing certain about JF is that he will go to any length to help them and try to protect his record on appeal at the same time.JMO:seeya:


No..as you said..it's to protect his record on appeal? The other reason..is to uphold the law, foremost. Many a judge will do what they have to by law..for appeal. If it were just to keep himself on the bench..he wouldn't be there now or in the future. He would not DARE to pick one side over the other..and he didn't IMO..he was fair to both sides..even more so to the defense than many judges might be..and he was correct to do so and very fair, imo.

the Phantom White Nail..well...I won't argue with that one..it was an "item" for the prosecution..and I don't doubt that it was a chip of the nail or a piece of plaster..the point is...something was missing from Lana's"nail"..and so either side had to "go with it". IDr. Lee didn't help things, frankly. t's Bias either way, searching...depending on what side you are..call it bias. I actually found it somewhat "not that important if not relevant"..but it was a big thing..mostly to downgrade Dr. Lee..but the LE should have found it, think? I think they did a huge quick sweep of the place..BOTH LE and PS's pack/posse...but in the after affect..they found something white..and in that castle..there could be a lot of "white" plaster and such...someone could have absconded with the nail piece..or it might by lying somewhere in the HOB or at Lana's house..or somewhere on the street. Still..it makes sense..with pulling a trigger on a gun OR defending ones self. So that's where it came into play. That as much as the eyelashes.seem pretty insignificant except to add to the whole scenario.

JF won't to go either side, imo..AJ will and so will DR and the defense team..that's their job. The state cannot fabricate things..but they will argue them..that's their job. The defense can come up with things to counter it..and they did and probably will this time. That "nail piece" has been put to rest..I think. It would only be Same old same old..UNLESS Dr. Lee takes the stand.

Personally...I've shot guns and never lost a nail...but I never had the acrylics...yet I've had some burns..and a "hurt" finger or thumb from the backlash..or a sore shoulder from a shotgun. And..there was plenty of Powder..if there were reason to investigate...from being in such close proximity of the shot...on me..and on the person standing next to me..albeit not a victim..but it surely would have shown who shot the gun..in comparison. Here in this case..it's so close...head to head, so to speak.

I respect your opinions, searching...and I'm not arguing with you at all...just commenting.

J

[kennedy06]

Gotta love that. Especially since they have run their canned trials more than once, including the one they were running when I flipped by today. I've seen that defendant's testimony before.

A live murder trail isn't good enough, because it's a retrial though. How foolish is that?

New Attorneys, New Jury, vs. rerunning canned trials, ooh, that's a real poser of a choice. NOT!

And bringing in attorneys to discuss the trial that was discussed when it was originally aired:rolleyes:

JMO

Maybe they are planning on showing a canned trial, PS1 during the next couple of months. Maybe its a suprise for us, just kidding of course.

JMO

[kennedy06]

I came across this a few minutes ago from Fox News on the jury. It has some interesting bits in it, such as the jury consultant who aided the Las Vegas prosecution of the OJ trial is assisting the LA prosecutors. JMO

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,443922,00.html

[kennedy06]

A link to The Herald concerning a documentary to air about PS. So that is where the idea for the hairstyle came from! JMO

http://www.theherald.co.uk/news/other/display.var.2463135.0.BBC_to_air_Phil_Spector_inte rview_before_his_retrial.php

[cherylt]

Just in case you haven't seen this, per J-13:

"Twelve jurors, seven men and five women, were chosen,Thursday, for the Phil Spector Retrial. Attorney's will be picking the six alternates next Monday.

The panel seated includes a research scientist, an Army veteran and a social worker once assigned to a psychiatric ward

Opening statements are scheduled to begin on Wednesday, October
29th."

C'mon Wednesday! Anyone know of anyone who may be reporting daily blogs? (besides the guy who wants his parking subsidized).. :)

[hiitsme]

He'll go down this time.

I think so too. Having been there, do you think the lack of massive media coverage and diminished interest will affect the proceedings one way or another?

[Jayne]

Thanks for the post, but I do have to go. You have raised some finer points for discussion. I leave this thread for now in your and gnm109's capable hands. By saying that I am not blowing smoke. You can guess where.;):patriot::hat:

I never think you're blowing smoke...you're adamant about your views and you have every right to them just as do we all.

I think some of us are finding the "fine line" is a bit "finer" between G and NG..and it might be as close or not so...as the election?! (sorry..couldn't help it!)

respectfully..J

[cherylt]

I think so too. Having been there, do you think the lack of massive media coverage and diminished interest will affect the proceedings one way or another?


I think the lack of coverage just may affect the outcome. If you watched OT3 trial, the 1st verdict was a hung jury. Then it was retried w/out live coverage & he was convicted. Maybe jurors are just more self conscious when there are sooo many cameras around...

[ellvarn]

Just in case you haven't seen this, per J-13:

"Twelve jurors, seven men and five women, were chosen,Thursday, for the Phil Spector Retrial. Attorney's will be picking the six alternates next Monday.

The panel seated includes a research scientist, an Army veteran and a social worker once assigned to a psychiatric ward

Opening statements are scheduled to begin on Wednesday, October
29th."

C'mon Wednesday! Anyone know of anyone who may be reporting daily blogs? (besides the guy who wants his parking subsidized).. :)


I don't know for sure - but Sprocket has a blog and she has been blooging about the jury selection. I think it's called "Trials and Tribulation" but no I don't have a link for you. I read some of it from the J-13 website.

Also the Juror Thirteen website has links to live trials on their home page-I think about 4 different live trials going on now that I am trying to keep up with. That is where I get my info. Sorry I couldn't give you anything more.

Have a good night everyone - :seeya:

[tartangirl]

Yet another link to a few more bits of information about this documentary tomorrow in the UK. From what I have read
about it here there and everywhere, it seems the same old arrrogant PHIL tortured artist attitude. Not a good enough reason to threaten women and men with guns. Never a good enough reason to kill someone. Hmmmm...agony for sure. The facts will point the way this time around in PS2 again.


http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/2008/oct/25/popandrock-television


~as always, my opinion only, Justice for Lana and those who love her~

[Jayne]

QUOTE=tartangirl;12335791][B][COLOR="Indigo"]Yet another link to a few more bits of information about this documentary tomorrow in the UK. From what I have read
about it here there and everywhere, it seems the same old arrrogant PHIL tortured artist attitude. Not a good enough reason to threaten women and men with guns. Never a good enough reason to kill someone. Hmmmm...agony for sure. The facts will point the way this time around in PS2 again.

You know..we are all tortured artists...but not all arrogant..
AND dang well..other artists..those who make and made headlines did not go around threatening people or pointing guns..much the less..Joan Baez..John Lennon...Paul McCartney...Smothers Brothers...could do on and on...

Ol Phil..I think..and I may well be wrong..but he felt the world owed HIM something...whether it was ethnic in nature..or just internal..I have no idea..Ya know..you choose to be a musician.then just go for it..and when it works..it works..when it doesn't..you take the high road or go back to square one..but not PS...he had to blame everyone for his momentary "misfortunes" which weren't many...he had the upper hand..he had a Gun in his pocket and he had the Contract...He was king of the hill and King of his Castle.

Lana pissed him off..bottom line...she wasn't about to go up the stairs like Ogden and just wonder "why did he do that"? or like his other female friends..who gave him much deference to his bad attitude. Or his friend who "allowed" him to have a gun in his trunk? Give me a stinking break.....either he's gonna be giving me some "payback"..or I'm not going to ride in the car where he has a gun in the trunk. What was UP with that? Frankly..I wouldn't ride in that car..I'd take the gun out..throw it in a ditch..then go for a nice dinner somewhere.

But the way he spewed it off about the nazi's - the stormtroopers..I think it was an ingrained or internal racist thing..and rightfully so I might say.the Nazi's were not NICE people...at ALL...but he was using it much like Cochran or any other person..including his hired hand Shapiro was "supposed to do" I think..according to PS's demands..but again..I'm just guessing.''

PS, imo, was using his heritage to make a claim of "oh woe is me"..doesn't work now...he's an American and he lives by our/his laws. He doesn't own the police although he thought or thinks he does...he can big tip anywhere he goes..but they know who he is TODAY...they'll still fussy up to him, I'm sure...but if it all came down to the end...he's the loser..no matter what this trial turns up. His big tipping days and getting what he wants will be over. If he's found not guilty or acquitted or another hung jury...he better order "in". There are only a few places..maybe his priorities?..that would accommodate him?

And.if I were Chelle..I'd be high tailing it outta there..soon..with my Cuisinart and whatever else matters..including those nice cutesy suits. And take the dogs..he apparently didn't care much about them..in cages and such. Shame on him. CA being CA..you'd think they'd try to show up in court with the dogs hanging on them.

jmo

J

[Jayne]

ooh...here we go...good posts..

:)

J

just takes a little egging on, huh?

[warhorse46]

You are so SMART and so RIGHT ON.depending on the state and the pleadings.

This Judge this time..is either going to impress that the sides prove their case..including the LIOS..and if they refuse to do that..he will stick by the law. And ..rightfully so..he is an HONEST JUDGE..

Shame on them..if they don't try..There is NO way..that VM can't be included..depending..as I've said ad nauseum...but I fear that the DA in LA is going only for the jugular..and may regret it..if not presented in the alternate fashion.

For the little I know...Why didn't PS listen to his first attorney Shapro?...MONIES later...more publicity...truth is...he'll die in his castle or in prison...I think...and his children and Lana's family will be bereft.. WHY? because he still got to live in his castle...and when it all comes down..if it does...there is no loss to him...sort of.

We may forever "love" his music..but there will be a smear/scourge on everything he's done.

jmo

J


I absolutely agree, some sort of manslaughter should be included & the crime does fit voluntary manslaughter to me. Even a conviction on manslaughter would likely be a life sentence for Spector if he got the max.

<<193. (a) Voluntary manslaughter is punishable by imprisonment in
the state prison for 3, 6, or 11 years.
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=pen&group=00001-01000&file=187-199 >>

[True2Blues]

The whole tortured artist thing is a bunch of bunk anyway. PS has been seeing a Psychiatrist since the 60's when he used it to avoid the draft. There's no excuse for him to be the way he is, except that he likes it and wants to be that way.

With him, everything that isn't acceptable or legal is someone else's fault.

The one and only person at fault in this case is PS.

[tartangirl]

Another link to more words that show the mind set of PS. Excuses and abuses....and the beat goes on. This wall of sound is full of cracks and defects and is sure to tumble down far sooner than later.


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/phil-spector-in-rare-interview-973133.html


~as always, my opinion only, Justice for Lana and those who love her~

[warhorse46]

Another link to more words that show the mind set of PS. Excuses and abuses....and the beat goes on. This wall of sound is full of cracks and defects and is sure to tumble down far sooner than later.


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/phil-spector-in-rare-interview-973133.html


~as always, my opinion only, Justice for Lana and those who love her~




<<"Every time I go to court [I think] the judge doesn't like me ... The first thing he does is to remind us that we are there because someone died. Why does he have to say that?">>
What an incredibly stupid statement IMO!

[GPSpector]

The whole tortured artist thing is a bunch of bunk anyway. PS has been seeing a Psychiatrist since the 60's when he used it to avoid the draft. There's no excuse for him to be the way he is, except that he likes it and wants to be that way.

With him, everything that isn't acceptable or legal is someone else's fault.

The one and only person at fault in this case is PS.

Actually, I was told by him that when he showed up for the draft, he told the Recruiter that he was a Bed Wetter. But if I remember correctly, I think what actually kept him out, dispite the hard time the Recruiter gave him, he was not able to serve because he was the last male in the family (due to his father's suicide) and so there was no one else to carry on the family name.

The real shame is that there is still no one willing to carry on the family name. :(

[dref99]

I absolutely agree, some sort of manslaughter should be included & the crime does fit voluntary manslaughter to me. Even a conviction on manslaughter would likely be a life sentence for Spector if he got the max.

<<193. (a) Voluntary manslaughter is punishable by imprisonment in
the state prison for 3, 6, or 11 years.
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=pen&group=00001-01000&file=187-199 >>

It was discussed many times during trial 1 that manslaughter just doesn't fit the California rules - during the jury instruction discussion BOTH sides agreed that the correct chage was Murder II. Even if the gun went off accidentally under California law producing a gun and pointing it at Lana was enough to remove manslaughter. The fact that there was no "intent" to murder was why it is not Murder I.

This is from the jury instructions - I don't have a link at the minute - I downloaded the pdf file last year - I will post a link if I can find it again

Summary of the definitions of murder

Murder - 1st or 2nd

1. The defendant committed an act that caused the death of another person
2. When the defendant acted he had a state of mind called malice aforethought
3. He killed without lawful excuse or justification

Malice aforethought

1. express malice - intended to kill

2. implied malice -
a - he intentionally committed an act
b - the natural consequences of the act were dangerous
c - knew at the time the act was dangereous
d - deliberately acted with conscious disregard for human life

The act of producing the gun was considered to be implied malice - He intentionally produced the gun, the consequences of this were dangerous, he knew it was dangerous & he had conscious disregard for Lana's life.

jmo

[kennedy06]

If nothing else we can see how he appears in this documentary. I'm not as computer savvy as the rest of you, is there a way to view this on the link's website? JMO

http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctwo/

[llylabrat]

:lol:Brilliant!! I'm sure such a statement.i.e.,"therefore see their stupid advertisers commercials." will certainly go a long way in encouraging them to carry the trial. Keep up rhe good work.:cool:


I calls them like I sees them. If the powers that be were sure the advertisers would be there & the advertisers were sure the viewers would be there, this trial would be carried. But they feel like this trial has been done, people wont hang in for the day to day, just check in to see the verdict this time around. And, who likes commercials anyway? They are stupid.

[kennedy06]

Yet another link to a few more bits of information about this documentary tomorrow in the UK. From what I have read
about it here there and everywhere, it seems the same old arrrogant PHIL tortured artist attitude. Not a good enough reason to threaten women and men with guns. Never a good enough reason to kill someone. Hmmmm...agony for sure. The facts will point the way this time around in PS2 again.


http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/2008/oct/25/popandrock-television


~as always, my opinion only, Justice for Lana and those who love her~


So he is concerned about not being made a doctor like Dylan? Hmmm I wonder how he likes the fact his fellow music procucer from the 60's, Joe Meek, that also had an incident where a woman was shot in his home but on Feb 3 1967, is having a UK MPG award named after him this coming year for music producer innovation. I find it strange as I have posted before about these two, the shootings (JM commited suicide directly after his shooting incident) being on the same date Feb 3, both seeming to have unique personalities, PS having a #1 hit Nov 62- He's a Rebel and JM #1 in Dec 62-Telstar, both music innovators and using echo.

So now we read PS is having a documentary on tv about him tonight Oct 25 at 9:40 on a BBC channel and gee Joe Meek is having a movie aired about his life (one known actor to me Kevin Spacey) being shown in a London Film festival also on Oct 25. One theater I noticed while looking into this shows his movie starts around 9 also. Strange coincidences still:shrug::read:

I can provide links for JM info. JMO

[kennedy06]

May I add one last thing. I had mentioned this a few months ago, but that music producer Joe M., I mentioned one of his last songs he produced before his Feb 3, 1967 murder/suicide was a song titled Please Stay. When I listened to the words of it, it was like OMG because I was listening to it in conjunction with a PS post I had made. So when I heard the lyrics... would you walk out the door.... please stay....don't go, I immediately thought of AJ and his Don't go in the closing.

Though I post of this stuff, I haven't forgotten Lana in all this, there are pictures of the evidence still. A beautiful woman that deserved to live her entire life to its fullest. I would post to her website but I find the link no longer works for me.

Oh and that song, just another bizarre coincidence again. JMO

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qIk-RU-gLbY

JMO

[warhorse46]

It was discussed many times during trial 1 that manslaughter just doesn't fit the California rules - during the jury instruction discussion BOTH sides agreed that the correct chage was Murder II. Even if the gun went off accidentally under California law producing a gun and pointing it at Lana was enough to remove manslaughter. The fact that there was no "intent" to murder was why it is not Murder I.

This is from the jury instructions - I don't have a link at the minute - I downloaded the pdf file last year - I will post a link if I can find it again

Summary of the definitions of murder

Murder - 1st or 2nd

1. The defendant committed an act that caused the death of another person
2. When the defendant acted he had a state of mind called malice aforethought
3. He killed without lawful excuse or justification

Malice aforethought

1. express malice - intended to kill

2. implied malice -
a - he intentionally committed an act
b - the natural consequences of the act were dangerous
c - knew at the time the act was dangereous
d - deliberately acted with conscious disregard for human life

The act of producing the gun was considered to be implied malice - He intentionally produced the gun, the consequences of this were dangerous, he knew it was dangerous & he had conscious disregard for Lana's life.

jmo


I am aware of all you say here, I watched the first trial & was here on the boards posting & taking part in the discussions. To my mind the crime fits the voluntary manslaughter statute of Ca then & still now.

<<192. Manslaughter is the unlawful killing of a human being without
malice. It is of three kinds:
(a) Voluntary--upon a sudden quarrel or heat of passion.
(b) Involuntary--in the commission of an unlawful act, not
amounting to felony; or in the commission of a lawful act which might
produce death, in an unlawful manner, or without due caution and
circumspection. This subdivision shall not apply to acts committed in
the driving of a vehicle.
(c) Vehicular--
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=pen&group=00001-01000&file=187-199 ??

[kennedy06]

This link is a must read if you are interested in that documentary and what PS has to say. It reveals PS thoughts from SPMc to life if sent down. This has a little more detail then the other links have.


JMO

http://www.mirror.co.uk/celebs/latest/2008/10/25/phil-spector-rants-about-his-relationship-with-the-beatles-ahead-of-his-murder-retrial-115875-20836885/

[GPSpector]

This link is a must read if you are interested in that documentary and what PS has to say. It reveals PS thoughts from SPMc to life if sent down. This has a little more detail then the other links have.


JMO

http://www.mirror.co.uk/celebs/latest/2008/10/25/phil-spector-rants-about-his-relationship-with-the-beatles-ahead-of-his-murder-retrial-115875-20836885/

I have no doubt, that my father could have been thought about like those he mentioned if he had not desired or demanded that kind of attention. The difference between those he wants to be compared to and him is, they did not become as famous as they are until after they died. I know in Dec 2002, I looked into and found out how someone gets a Star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame (not cheap) and I had discussed it with my Brothers. That all ended Feb 2003.

I find those that demand or expect respect, do not get it. It is given to those that earn it, not demand it. I wish he understood that. He would find that he would get a lot more respect if he would just learn to respect others and that goes for his family as well. He would be a lot happier if he could just learn to even respect his own family members and stop expecting us to be "yes" men.

As to why no one told him how over the top his hair was, it's because he surrounds himself with "yes" men. Besides, I thought Rachelle stated in an interview that she did his hair for that day.

[True2Blues]

This link is a must read if you are interested in that documentary and what PS has to say. It reveals PS thoughts from SPMc to life if sent down. This has a little more detail then the other links have.


JMO

http://www.mirror.co.uk/celebs/latest/2008/10/25/phil-spector-rants-about-his-relationship-with-the-beatles-ahead-of-his-murder-retrial-115875-20836885/

Thanks Kennedy. What a piece of ........he is. He wants a Doctorate, for what? One idea and the ability to beat it to death? Puh-leeze.

He thinks Fidler is a mean SOB? Well, from a man who has demanded that he be catered to and pumped up all of his life, I guess a Judge who treats him like every other defendant, no favortism, no coddling, is probably a big shock.

It does show what HUGE Ego he has. Selfish, bitter, mean little man.

[roytoy]

Thanks Kennedy. What a piece of ........he is. He wants a Doctorate, for what? One idea and the ability to beat it to death? Puh-leeze.

He thinks Fidler is a mean SOB? Well, from a man who has demanded that he be catered to and pumped up all of his life, I guess a Judge who treats him like every other defendant, no favortism, no coddling, is probably a big shock.

It does show what HUGE Ego he has. Selfish, bitter, mean little man.



what a tool. hope he gets his due. and soon.

[True2Blues]

what a tool. hope he gets his due. and soon.

:seeya: Hi Roytoy!
I'm with you there. This has been put off for too long.

[kennedy06]

I have no doubt, that my father could have been thought about like those he mentioned if he had not desired or demanded that kind of attention. The difference between those he wants to be compared to and him is, they did not become as famous as they are until after they died. I know in Dec 2002, I looked into and found out how someone gets a Star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame (not cheap) and I had discussed it with my Brothers. That all ended Feb 2003.

I find those that demand or expect respect, do not get it. It is given to those that earn it, not demand it. I wish he understood that. He would find that he would get a lot more respect if he would just learn to respect others and that goes for his family as well. He would be a lot happier if he could just learn to even respect his own family members and stop expecting us to be "yes" men.

As to why no one told him how over the top his hair was, it's because he surrounds himself with "yes" men. Besides, I thought Rachelle stated in an interview that she did his hair for that day.

I don't know who helped him with that particular "shocked" look hairstyle but they had to have known how strange he looked in it. So much for his yes people. I would have associated it more with Don King than Albert Einstein.

I have to say I was amazed that he spoke so openly about his feelings about the honors bestowed apon others. I guess most of all I was most surprised by his Bubba comment. I guess that could have been a joke as I didn't hear him say it or how he said it, or he just thinks he has some pretty powerful persuasion techniques.:shrug:

I know people say that people at his age don't change, lets hope he is the exception to the rule. I can't help but say that was thoughtful you looked into a star. I realize no matter what he is still your Dad. Lana is till her Mother's daughter, what a tragedy all of this is.

JMO

[Jayne]

This link is a must read if you are interested in that documentary and what PS has to say. It reveals PS thoughts from SPMc to life if sent down. This has a little more detail then the other links have.


JMO

http://www.mirror.co.uk/celebs/latest/2008/10/25/phil-spector-rants-about-his-relationship-with-the-beatles-ahead-of-his-murder-retrial-115875-20836885/


Precious Link, Kennedy.

Does PS have a "mute" button? Good lord..he should! WHAT is he thinking? or not thinking? Where are his defense attorneys with their chloroform or GAG rags?

Where is Chelle? slap that husband upside his head, huh?

Of course..this is just UK rags...so I guess it doesn't mean a lot? think?

jmo

J


J

[dref99]

I am aware of all you say here, I watched the first trial & was here on the boards posting & taking part in the discussions. To my mind the crime fits the voluntary manslaughter statute of Ca then & still now.

<<192. Manslaughter is the unlawful killing of a human being without
malice. It is of three kinds:
(a) Voluntary--upon a sudden quarrel or heat of passion.
(b) Involuntary--in the commission of an unlawful act, not
amounting to felony; or in the commission of a lawful act which might
produce death, in an unlawful manner, or without due caution and
circumspection. This subdivision shall not apply to acts committed in
the driving of a vehicle.
(c) Vehicular--
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=pen&group=00001-01000&file=187-199 ??


I could accept Voluntary manslaughter except for the fact that it was with a gun - that he had to have produced for some reason & it was a gun that required some effort to discharge - hence the implied malice.

Manslaughter may give a doubting juror an out - but from the law as I see it - the charge should be murder. This fits with the suicide defense - attempting to prove that Lana produced the gun - not Phil.

But I also agree it may change this time if the defense fights for the option. His lawyers seem to be more inclined to fight based on the law than on the facts and this may be to Phil's benefit

I have always thought that his first lawyer probably negotiated (or wanted to negotiate) a manslaughter plea - but Phil refused that option.


jmo

[NYGalPal]

It's not correct to say that people use the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution if they are guilty. There are other reasons why a person might do this.

In fact, when a person pleads the Fifth Amendment, it's reversible error for the prosecutor to make a statement to the jury at any time during the trial that because of pleading the Fifth Amendment a defendant is guilty or suspect.

In any case, it's something that any defendant has the right to plead. It is a Constitutional Protection that was added to the original document with the Bill of Rights in 1789 and for good reason. The new Americans didn't want to have the old English law wherein a person could be tortured until they gave up information wanted by the state.

Surely you must know this..............................:confused:

The 5th AM's provision of self incrimination was not made applicable to the states until 1964. The federal constitution, when ratified only applied to the federal government.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0378_0001_ZS.html

Surely, you should have known this.

:confused:

[llylabrat]

This link is a must read if you are interested in that documentary and what PS has to say. It reveals PS thoughts from SPMc to life if sent down. This has a little more detail then the other links have.


JMO

http://www.mirror.co.uk/celebs/latest/2008/10/25/phil-spector-rants-about-his-relationship-with-the-beatles-ahead-of-his-murder-retrial-115875-20836885/


Wow! This is Spector ranting sober (presumably). Can you imagine being a woman with this man when he is drunk & holding a gun? Did he imply his SONG made Scorsese and DeNiros careers????????????? The gall!

[hiitsme]

Wow! This is Spector ranting sober (presumably). Can you imagine being a woman with this man when he is drunk & holding a gun? Did he imply his SONG made Scorsese and DeNiros careers????????????? The gall!

What a bizarre dark world he lives in!

[NYGalPal]

Does anyone think PS will take the stand this time?

[NYGalPal]

I say not a chance.

You're probably right. He's too much of a coward.

[NYGalPal]

That, and wouldn't the pros. have a heyday!

Absolutely, PS wouldn't last 5 minutes. hammer

[Anakerie]

Does anyone think PS will take the stand this time?

His attorneys would be certified insane if they allowed him to take the stand to testify in his own defense. I do not believe that Phil would be able to convince anyone of his "innocence".

[NYGalPal]

His attorneys would be certified insane if they allowed him to take the stand to testify in his own defense. I do not believe that Phil would be able to convince anyone of his "innocence".

I don't believe it either. He's too guilty and arrogant.

He's got some nerve bashing the judge and then claim he was 8 feet away when he had blood splatered all over him.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/celebritynews/3255616/Phil-Spector-breaks-his-silence-over-Lana-Clarkson-murder-trial.html

barf