Feb. 2 thru Feb.23

[hiitsme]

After reading Sprocket's blog detailing Alan Jackson's cross, I am at a loss as to how that outrageously expensive testimony helped the defense theory that Lana held the gun and pulled the trigger. He conceded to a few crucial points which favor the prosecution. I will admit that I find "blood spatter" analysis confusing, so for that amount of money I was expecting an AHA moment from Mr. James. In my view, Alan Jackson has once again leveled the playing field.

[dref99]

What's the big deal? There is no law in the Universe, written or unwritten, that says every person must read one specific blog and deem it the greatest piece of reporting ever to be done.

It's a matter of personal preference, not an attack and worth attacking over. No one said don't read it. Read what you like and we'll do the same. Why is everyone taking this so personally? Geesh.

I have not overly praised or criticised anyone - I simply am trying to understand why folks are determined not to read the most useful information available about the trial. I enjoy discussing the legalities of the issues, and the evidence as presented by both sides. The more people who join the discussion the more interesting it may become, but if you cannot for some reason, read the detail of the sessions, it becomes rather difficult to discuss.

The way it appears, AJ cross examined the most recent witness - highlighting that all the PP presentation was for "teaching jurors" and did not replicate anything in this case.

Followed up by discussing how could an example of blood falling 100cm (that's a meter - over 3feet) and many other examples be relevant to this case. Things started to sound a little like an aha moment again, and a brief comment by the witness (then corrected) that an "exception to gravity" occurred.

I did not read alot of benefit to the defense in this session, but if anyone saw it differently, please give some details.

Regardless, I am still impressed with Weinberg, He seems to keep well away from surrounding events - concentrating purely on the PS defense - in comparison to some of the lawyers in trial 1.

jmo

[dref99]

After reading Sprocket's blog detailing Alan Jackson's cross, I am at a loss as to how that outrageously expensive testimony helped the defense theory that Lana held the gun and pulled the trigger. He conceded to a few crucial points which favor the prosecution. I will admit that I find "blood spatter" analysis confusing, so for that amount of money I was expecting an AHA moment from Mr. James. In my view, Alan Jackson has once again leveled the playing field.

How come you said that so much better than me - using half the number of words :biggrin: :biggrin:

[hiitsme]

How come you said that so much better than me - using half the number of words :biggrin: :biggrin:

That's a compliment, because I have difficulty with short concise responses. You just outlined the details I had in mind before I posted!

[Spectorfan8]

Hello everyone,

After sleeping on it and talking to a friend, he helped me decide to stay.


Spectorfan8 is BACK!!!!

[tartangirl]

Sometimes things just make sense after a good night's sleep and a quiet talk with a friend. :smile:

You should stay as long as you can....it is getting juicy..is that possible with a murder trial?...and you will feel better seeing it to the end.

No matter how we all feel here, some posters are good to have around. I think you just might be one of those posters. :wink:

take care,

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

[Spectorfan8]

Sometimes things just make sense after a good night's sleep and a quiet talk with a friend. :smile:

You should stay as long as you can....it is getting juicy..is that possible with a murder trial?...and you will feel better seeing it to the end.

No matter how we all feel here, some posters are good to have around. I think you just might be one of those posters. :wink:

take care,

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











Touche' :wink:

[kennedy06]

Since I missed the turnover of the threads I will thank my2cents for the link to the hotel lawsuit. It was interesting to read the agent was dropped from the suit, though the name Jennifer B. sounds very similar to the name Sprocket mentions as sitting at the defense table? Maybe a coincidence or I'm missing something.

As for Joe F., I also wonder who he/she is but they do seem to mention a thing or two at times that Sprocket doesn't like a cell phone going off or whatnot. So I guess it is just a guess as to who is really writing that blog but, I would take it they are in that courtroom many times or at least they are getting a heads up from someone that is:confused:

[kennedy06]

So today is Feb 2. We can once again look back on the events in both Phil's and Lana's lives that led up to that fateful night. I was thinking about Lana's shoes the mary janes a shoe that gives the sense of innocents and sensibility. hmmm

Tomorrow Feb 3 a date that touched the music industry with, Richie Valens, The Big Bopper, Buddy Holly, Joe Meek and Phil, all having a collision with fate on that date. Just a coincidence but still such a defining date for their lives.

[kennedy06]

I should clarify my post, I speak of the Mary Janes that Mrs. C mentioned in her testimony, in a complimentary way on Lana's behalf.

[hiitsme]

Hello everyone,

After sleeping on it and talking to a friend, he helped me decide to stay.


Spectorfan8 is BACK!!!!

You have good friends! Besides, as a NG you patiently and probably, at times, painfully sat through the pros. case! Now that the defense is "at bat" you must be at least curious as to what they'll present. In any event, I'm glad you're back too.

[True2Blues]

Hello everyone,

After sleeping on it and talking to a friend, he helped me decide to stay.


Spectorfan8 is BACK!!!!

I'm glad to see you thought it over and decided to stay Spectorfan8!:thumbsup:

[True2Blues]

After reading Sprocket's blog for Thursday's testimony... on recross, it appears the expert for the defense just agreed that some of the back spatter (on the white jacket) came from the gunshot event.

This does not bode well for the defense! :blushing:

Even though the defense in the last trial threw all of those names around and mentioned their books last time, the books themselves still supported what the State's witnesses said.

These Defense witnesses can speculate about whether or not it's possible for some 'million to one' chance rarity to have occurred, but when it comes back to what most likely happened, it goes back to what was stated by the State's witnesses.

[dref99]

Hello everyone,

After sleeping on it and talking to a friend, he helped me decide to stay.


Spectorfan8 is BACK!!!!

great idea of you and friend - welome back :smile:

[My 2 Cents]

Does any one else find it odd that the defense can present testimony, such as James' Power Point presentation, that has NOTHING to do with the facts in evidence for this case? I don't understand why JF would allow the PP presentation. It seemed that James' testimony, via AJ's cross, is that ALL those tests, photos, etc did NOT represent what happened to LC. And James only stated this AFTER he was asked it by AJ. So why is it even allowed to be shown or discussed? It only served to confuse jurors - thinking it must somehow relate to what happened on 2/3/03. It seems like DW would go thru the roof if AJ tried to present evidence like that (and I can't see AJ trying to "confuse" the jurors with misleading info anyway).

I was also surprised that James could testify on the stand what the other 2 (3?) "blood spatter" experts (that James discussed these results with) thought. The experts also being paid by Spector. I thought that was considered HEARSAY, since the defense can subpoena those experts and have them testify that they agreed with James. How can AJ cross exam these 2 or 3 people to verify that they in fact did agree with James' conclusions about these tests? This would avoid the issue of whether James is understanding what these experts really meant - - let them speak for themselves and let AJ have an opportunity to cross exam them. (Heaven forbid, if Punkin Pie was picked to be the spokesperson for ALL of Lana's friends, with regards to them being in agreement to Lana's state of mind.)

[kennedy06]

Maybe AJ has a copy of all three of their bills and payments made to them! Birds of a feather and all.

[My 2 Cents]

Maybe AJ has a copy of all three of their bills and payments made to them! Birds of a feather and all.

Yes K6, I agree. But what I was actually wanting to express with regards to James' testimony (about what these 3 OTHER EXPERTS THOUGHT). James' is speaking for them. I thought that was an OBJECTION because it is 100% HEARSAY.

James said, on direct from DW:
"James states this blood stain on Spector's cuff is a transfer stain. To back up his opinion, he stated that three professional associates, who he has the utmost respect for and their combined total expertize is over 100 years of experience, all agree that this stain is a transfer stain, and not spatter.

It seems to me (but what the heck do I know . . ha, ha). Just thought it odd and not allowed. IMO . . AND GLAD AJ cleared it up (blood spatter vs transfer stain on cuff) on cross . . IMO.

[Spectorfan8]

Glad you had a chance to re-think it and you decided not to leave.

thank you, after all we need a NG on here. Right?:wink:

SF8

[Spectorfan8]

The thought process are not hard to understand when you compare it to the guilty thought processes. Two people listen to the trial and come to two different conclusions. For whatever reason there was one juror in trial 1 who felt that the state did not meet the burden of beyond a resonable doubt. It is a very tough standard and he has no reason to have to defend his final opinion. My opinion of Harvey Philip Spector is that he guilty of first degree premeditated murder. Taking a loaded gun out from concelment removed any possibility of "accidental" in my opinion. I would not force this opinion on anyone else even though some folks think I am arrogant, long winded and pompous. People who own guns and are trained in their use will understand where I am coming from. I do have respect for the logic and beliefs of 2 of the NG's but the others are just fact wackers with no supplied logic to back up the boom-boom of their drum beat. I for one and very pleased to see SF8 stay. I admire the posters courage to stay. Thank you!

Mortie

Mortie,

I totally agree with you on people having different opinions.
Thank you, I am glad that I stayed too.:wink:

SF8

[My 2 Cents]

hello everyone,

after sleeping on it and talking to a friend, he helped me decide to stay.


Spectorfan8 is back!!!!

welcome back sf8

You're a thoughtful, respected poster on InSession and I always welcome your comments. I am glad to hear that you are staying. Keep all the "G" posters on their toes! Besides, . . . a "Thelma" without a "Louise", just wouldn't be the same, now would it?

Also . . . Happy Groundhog's Day Everyone
So ALL of those posters living in Pennsylvania, did Punxsutawney Phil see his shadow? Do we know how many more weeks of winter are left? (Because here in So Calif that is important . . .ha, ha - - Sorry, not trying to be mean to those, up to there elbows, in snow.)

[Spectorfan8]

welcome back sf8

You're a thoughtful, respected poster on InSession and I always welcome your comments. I am glad to hear that you are staying. Keep all the "G" posters on their toes! Besides, . . . a "Thelma" without a "Louise", just wouldn't be the same, now would it?

Also . . . Happy Groundhog's Day Everyone
So ALL of those posters living in Pennsylvania, did Punxsutawney Phil see his shadow? Do we know how many more weeks of winter are left? (Because here in So Calif that is important . . .ha, ha - - Sorry, not trying to be mean to those, up to there elbows, in snow.)

Thank you. Yes, there will be six more weeks of winter. I hate it, but like you, I live on the south east coast.LOL For those in the snow keep warm.
I always like to read your posts after you have been to court, first rate reporting!!

[GPSpector]

Great. A new month and a new thread.

[GPSpector]

Does any one else find it odd that the defense can present testimony, such as James' Power Point presentation, that has NOTHING to do with the facts in evidence for this case? I don't understand why JF would allow the PP presentation. It seemed that James' testimony, via AJ's cross, is that ALL those tests, photos, etc did NOT represent what happened to LC. And James only stated this AFTER he was asked it by AJ. So why is it even allowed to be shown or discussed? It only served to confuse jurors - thinking it must somehow relate to what happened on 2/3/03. It seems like DW would go thru the roof if AJ tried to present evidence like that (and I can't see AJ trying to "confuse" the jurors with misleading info anyway).

I was also surprised that James could testify on the stand what the other 2 (3?) "blood spatter" experts (that James discussed these results with) thought. The experts also being paid by Spector. I thought that was considered HEARSAY, since the defense can subpoena those experts and have them testify that they agreed with James. How can AJ cross exam these 2 or 3 people to verify that they in fact did agree with James' conclusions about these tests? This would avoid the issue of whether James is understanding what these experts really meant - - let them speak for themselves and let AJ have an opportunity to cross exam them. (Heaven forbid, if Punkin Pie was picked to be the spokesperson for ALL of Lana's friends, with regards to them being in agreement to Lana's state of mind.)

I think it was DW's version of the "Chewbacca" defense :biggrin:

[dref99]

Does any one else find it odd that the defense can present testimony, such as James' Power Point presentation, that has NOTHING to do with the facts in evidence for this case? I don't understand why JF would allow the PP presentation. It seemed that James' testimony, via AJ's cross, is that ALL those tests, photos, etc did NOT represent what happened to LC. And James only stated this AFTER he was asked it by AJ. So why is it even allowed to be shown or discussed? It only served to confuse jurors - thinking it must somehow relate to what happened on 2/3/03. It seems like DW would go thru the roof if AJ tried to present evidence like that (and I can't see AJ trying to "confuse" the jurors with misleading info anyway).

I was also surprised that James could testify on the stand what the other 2 (3?) "blood spatter" experts (that James discussed these results with) thought. The experts also being paid by Spector. I thought that was considered HEARSAY, since the defense can subpoena those experts and have them testify that they agreed with James. How can AJ cross exam these 2 or 3 people to verify that they in fact did agree with James' conclusions about these tests? This would avoid the issue of whether James is understanding what these experts really meant - - let them speak for themselves and let AJ have an opportunity to cross exam them. (Heaven forbid, if Punkin Pie was picked to be the spokesperson for ALL of Lana's friends, with regards to them being in agreement to Lana's state of mind.)

Apart from the fact that JF is doing all in his power to avoid an appeal (which appears to me as "over" support for the defense, but probably is not)

I remember in trial one the accolades for defense experts taking days. (To not show bias - there was a fair amount of time listing resumes for the prosecution as well). No doubt the PP was to assist in explaining the expertise and in showing to the jurors what the expertise is all about - as "a jury training aid" Under the rules JF sets, this would be (and obviously was) acceptable.

As for the other experts, it was mentioned on the blog (I think) that at least one of them will be called - as for the other, it does sound like hearsay to me - but my knowledge has no authority behind it whatsoever, and perhaps they will both be called.

It would seem that a lot of money is spent on experts and alot spent in disagreeing with their conclusions. Some jury members did say in trial 1 that they all disregarded the defense "experts" but perhaps an "aha" moment had something to do with that.

I did like the image painted (that we could only read about) of trying to get below the chair to indicate that the chair was low to the ground & there was not a high distance for anything to fall.

jmo

[kennedy06]

Since today is Feb 2, Lana's last day with her Mother, meeting and emailing friends and living life as she knew it I thought it would be nice to do something in honor of her today. I don't write as eloquently as the majority here so I am limited in my efforts. I looked in the TDW of S at the words of her friend Bill Craig (pg 196 and paraphrasing) she was proud of getting her job, it was the VIP room, she would be meeting people at the top.

She did meet a member of that special VIP Lounge that night as we all know, and that meeting brings us to this board to post.

So, I'll post this utube song many of us have heard before as my way of noting the date and paying my respects to someone I never knew but have come to know through this trial, the lyrics can be found by clicking more on the video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9vjkuksPgE0&feature=related

[kennedy06]

Shopping for shoes, helping pick up photos a few weeks earlier, we learn of a Mother's love for her daughter during this retrial.

From this article for ABC Primetime in 2005:

She was so deeply affected by her daughter's death that she has kept Clarkson's cell phone activated for two years --

http://abcnews.go.com/Primetime/Entertainment/Story?id=442185&page=1

[My 2 Cents]

Well, he may NOT be the "Official" PUNXSUTAWNEY PHIL because he resides in Alhambra. But this (Alhambra) PHIL also stuck his spiky little head outside today (2/2/09) and saw his SHADOW as well. Because this PHIL (6 years after Lana's death) is still NOT sitting in a windowless jail cell or inside any prison. However, ALHAMBRA PHIL may not be as lucky as PUNXSUTAWNEY PHIL. He may NOT get a chance to experience 6 more weeks of winter. If the defense rests in another couple of weeks, then this PHIL may be sitting inside a prison cell, with no doors or windows, come the 1st day of Spring and this may have been the last Groundhog's Day that "ALHAMBRA" PHIL gets to stick his head outside to check for any shadow . . or ANYTHING for that matter.

. . . Sorry, my lame attempt at Groundhog's Day humor, a la (PUNXSUTAWNEY) Phil. :rolleyes:

[My 2 Cents]

Shopping for shoes, helping pick up photos a few weeks earlier, we learn of a Mother's love for her daughter during this retrial.

From this article for ABC Primetime in 2005:

She was so deeply affected by her daughter's death that she has kept Clarkson's cell phone activated for two years --

http://abcnews.go.com/Primetime/Entertainment/Story?id=442185&page=1

Thanks K6, that was a very nice article. I had not read that before. How touching - her Mom keeping Lana's cell phone number activated, and all the very tasteful and classy statements Mrs Clarkson made. It would be so much easier (and no one would fault her for it), to say what was really on your mind and rip into Phil Spector and the way he has handled her daughter's death . . . but she doesn't. That says a great deal about Mrs Clarkson, and it gives us, the outsider, a glimpse at the type of role model and mother she was to Lana and her siblings.

[dref99]

yesterdays (tis later than I thought) testimony - short day
http://sprocket-trials.blogspot.com/

[My 2 Cents]

Since today is Feb 2, Lana's last day with her Mother, meeting and emailing friends and living life as she knew it I thought it would be nice to do something in honor of her today. I don't write as eloquently as the majority here so I am limited in my efforts. I looked in the TDW of S at the words of her friend Bill Craig (pg 196 and paraphrasing) she was proud of getting her job, it was the VIP room, she would be meeting people at the top.

She did meet a member of that special VIP Lounge that night as we all know, and that meeting brings us to this board to post.

So, I'll post this utube song many of us have heard before as my way of noting the date and paying my respects to someone I never knew but have come to know through this trial, the lyrics can be found by clicking more on the video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9vjkuksPgE0&feature=related

Following YOUR LEAD K6 . . . and your idea in honoring Lana on the anniversary of her death, I started a separate thread for paying tribute to her and/or her family members on this day. The "youtube" video you selected is a wonderful choice. I tried to move it over to that thread . . . but I couldn't do it - I'm "technically" challenged. Perhaps you wouldn't mind reposting it over there.

Thanks for the video and great reminder of who Lana was. And what a gorgeous woman she was - - I get so furious when I think of Dr DiMaio (or was it Dr Spitz) up on the stand implying that Lana was so 'over-the-hill' for the movie business, because ya know, she's "NOT exactly a PARIS HILTON" anymore, or some such ridiculous statement.

[dref99]

Harriet Ryan reported on the evidence of Nicole Spector
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/02/spector-trial.html

[hiitsme]

Harriet Ryan reported on the evidence of Nicole Spector
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/02/spector-trial.html

I would venture to say that there are women who are simply forgiving, and then there are those who just like "bad boys" especially rich and famous ones. Who's to say this makes them liars? Mentioning DM again may just remind the jury of the PBA against her as well as those against the other women who also testified to having a gun put to their face by PS.

[tartangirl]

6 years today...I wonder if PS has thought about it...

For Lana :rose::rose:


If he has forgotten, please tell me he has not, I would hope someone reminds him by word or by deed....:angry:


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

[My 2 Cents]

Just finished with the FedEx folks at getting a good discount on shipping rates. There is a package on its was to you with about 5,000 pounds of snow that I removed from my driveway. Oh by the way, I sent it COD.

Mortie

PS Punxsutawney Phil did not see his shadow, more winter ahead, thank you!

Well Mortie, . . . if it is any consolation, OUR freeways are ugly and we don't get to enjoy those beautiful "changing Fall colors" each October.
But I do look forward to the 5,000 lbs of snow, that will be quite a hit in our neighborhood. :wink:

[wasapi]

Regarding Nicoles testimony;

During the first trial, wasn't the only thing Nicole testified about was which hand her father uses? And if my memory is correct, why didn't she testify about this trip with DM the first time?

[Spectorfan8]

Regarding Nicoles testimony;

During the first trial, wasn't the only thing Nicole testified about was which hand her father uses? And if my memory is correct, why didn't she testify about this trip with DM the first time?

Not sure, but it could be because Ms. Melvin changed her testimony from the first trial. Maybe the defense thought it would help in letting the jury know for sure that Ms. Melvin did continue to see Mr. Spector.
I only offer my opinion.


SF8

[GPSpector]

Regarding Nicoles testimony;

During the first trial, wasn't the only thing Nicole testified about was which hand her father uses? And if my memory is correct, why didn't she testify about this trip with DM the first time?

Wow, I just read on T&T about my Sister on the Stand.

She never ceases to amaze me.

She claims she moved out of my fathers house while still living with him :confused: Must be a creative writing technique.

Also, she claimed our father is 69 because he was born on Dec 26th 1939. Sorry, He was born, December 26, 1940. Check what ever reference you want on that. My father will be 69 this year.

[wasapi]

I just finished reading the article.

Am I missing something but didn't Nicole just admit that she was WITH Ms Melvin and Mr PS alone? Implying that Ms Melvin lied about never being alone. How could Ms Melvin be "alone" with Mr PS if Nicole is with them both?

Also, stating what Ms Melvin said is pure Hearsay and if she repeated hat on the Stand, they could call call Ms Melvin to rebuttal it or just deny its entry into evidence.

Why is it that everytime I hear her speak, I shake my head and ask, : "Does she not hear what she is saying?"

Casper, I was wondering the exact same thing. Unless Nicole testified that though they all 3 went to Toronto, still there were periods of time that she was off by herself and Ms Melvin and her father were alone together during those times, her testimony seems to contridict itself.

Again, it is so frustrating not being able to hear the testimony. I hate speculating when I don't know the facts.

[wasapi]

Wow, I just read on T&T about my Sister on the Stand.

She never ceases to amaze me.

She claims she moved out of my fathers house while still living with him :confused: Must be a creative writing technique.

Also, she claimed our father is 69 because he was born on Dec 26th 1939. Sorry, He was born, December 26, 1940. Check what ever reference you want on that. My father will be 69 this year.

Gary, she does seem to have selective memory, as well as the ability to rewrite history.

Those skills could come in handy. Amazing.

[GPSpector]

Gary, she does seem to have selective memory, as well as the ability to rewrite history.

Those skills could come in handy. Amazing.

I was impressed with her starting Collage at age 17 though, even if the School year starts August/September and her Birthday is in October. I was still impressed.

I graduated HS at 19 but only because my Birthday is in May and Graduation was in June.

[wasapi]

Gary, that is impressive. My sons both started college, one at 16 and the other at 17.

However, your sister - at least from my observations - is an example of something I have believed for a long time. Intelligence doesn't always go hand-in-hand with common sense or ethics. In my opinion, she has lied - or at least embellished - under oath.

[kennedy06]

I'm very curious about this trip. I hope the prosecution will bring D. M. back to the stand and hear her side of this story.

I also am curious if DM had continued to speak to Nicole because she knew she was so young and in NY as a student. Maybe she wanted to be kind, show her the town so to speak? I don't take visiting with her as a sign she "wanted" PS. Some people are just nice to others especially children or teenagers.

[FloA]

Greetings

Seems I've been absent from this board so long I only recognize a few nics here. :confused:

Just stopping by to express my sorrow for Lana's true friends and family and how they must be feeling on this day.

For those of us who watched the first trial and follow the retrial so far, it's astounding to realize 6 years have passed without a conviction in this case.

For Lana and her Family. :rose::rose:

[GPSpector]

Wow, I just read on T&T about my Sister on the Stand.

She never ceases to amaze me.

She claims she moved out of my fathers house while still living with him :confused: Must be a creative writing technique.

Also, she claimed our father is 69 because he was born on Dec 26th 1939. Sorry, He was born, December 26, 1940. Check what ever reference you want on that. My father will be 69 this year.


Well, I must post a Retraction:

After receiving a PM from a kind poster, it got me to question the Year my father was born. Even though there will be a dozen or so sources that claim 1940, I decided to look for legal documents.

I am please to say that even though my father told me he was born in 1940 (he also told be he was born on Dec 25 too), I found that he was in deed born Dec 26, 1939 and is now 69 years old.

[tartangirl]

Greetings

Seems I've been absent from this board so long I only recognize a few nics here. :confused:

Just stopping by to express my sorrow for Lana's true friends and family and how they must be feeling on this day.

For those of us who watched the first trial and follow the retrial so far, it's astounding to realize 6 years have passed without a conviction in this case.

For Lana and her Family.
Hey FloA :biggrin: You might have been gone but you are not forgotten. The nics change, some of the people stay the same and the sad state of this case is slowly moving toward a guilty verdict within the next few months. Yes, the one constant is that Phil Spector is still free and walking this good earth.

Today, this bothers me more than I can say.

Keep the faith FloA, we have the best team of prosecutors around
working as advocates for Lana. :wink:

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

[dref99]

Regarding Nicoles testimony;

During the first trial, wasn't the only thing Nicole testified about was which hand her father uses? And if my memory is correct, why didn't she testify about this trip with DM the first time?

IIRC that was the testimony given. There was quite a debate with the lawyers as the prosecution wanted to make sure she was not allowed to speak as to character & similar. She did talk about him reading her a story?? or was it what they ate for breakfast perhaps? GP may remember any other items about her personal life that were mentioned.

This time around, I just think PS has a much better legal team. I would think in discussions with Nicole, perhaps mention of the trip came up - and Weinberg (or assistant/s) picked up on this memory as relevant to the trial.

PS, however, may not think he has a better team, when the jury gives a verdict - that discussion, however, is for another time.

jmo

[dref99]

Nicole may have opened Pandora's box about other personality traits of Phil Spector.

Could the prosecution now call the other Spector children in Phase 2?

I don't think personality got mentioned? This was why there were severe restrictions on the testimony in trial 1. Mentioning going away with someone is not talking personality as I understand it. Thus said, of course I didn't see her testimony - were you there - were other things discussed than have been reported in the press or on blogs?

tia

jmo

[dref99]

To partly answer my own question - reading the T&T blog there seems to be some issues in regards to questions asked by Weinberg of Dr. Lakshmanan in regard to cause of death - I probably need to read it 3 times - being able to replay parts from trial 1, was so very useful


jmo

[My 2 Cents]

I had an opportunity to attend most of court today (not all). I will share some info later tonight, I can't post much right now. But just wanted to mention a quick item right now:

FOUNTAIN UPDATE:
Tomorrow (2/4/03), at 9:30AM the FOUNTAIN INSPECTION will take place. AJ was having difficulty arranging the inspection because apparently the Fountain "specialist"/"inspector" had very few openings in which he could arrange the inspection on such short notice, that also worked for Mrs Spector. AJ asked Rachelle in court (jurors were not present) if the inspector could be there tomorrow at 9:30AM, and Rachelle replied in court that it was not a very good time for her, because she wanted to be here in court tomorrow morning, for her husband, instead. Judge Fidler recommended that she get another person or family member to be there to meet the inspector for the fountain appointment, and then she could still be in court. Rachelle then agreed to make the necessary arrangements. (Coincidentally, Rachelle was absent today for the morning court session. Guess it wasn't that important today.)

[dref99]

My 2 Cents - many thanks, I so look forward to reading any and all you would like to share - your reports are always interesting and worth waiting for. Many thanks for the fountain update.

Perhaps Mortie's description of the valves will be confirmed (my bolding)
A water valve, ball or gate, can provide infinite variability of settings and can control the amount of water the pump can pump
http://boards.insessiontrials.com/showthread.php?p=12716696&highlight=fountain#post12716696

[FloA]

Hey FloA You might have been gone but you are not forgotten. The nics change, some of the people stay the same and the sad state of this case is slowly moving toward a guilty verdict within the next few months. Yes, the one constant is that Phil Spector is still free and walking this good earth.

Today, this bothers me more than I can say.

Keep the faith FloA, we have the best team of prosecutors around
working as advocates for Lana. :wink:

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


Hey Tartangirl.

Good to see you here. Guess I should read back to see what's been happening. The way I see it, though..... It's the same old, same old with some new players doing their best to wedge in even more crap to confuse the jurors.

:seeya: Dianna and :seeya: NavyMom

[lmercer]

Lets hope and pray this man gets put where he belongs.
check out this news article, the defense is trying a new risky tactic.


http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/28800299/

[My 2 Cents]

Ok, I’m not even sure where to start. There is just so much testimony and it comes so quick and at times, so technical - - that I would be lost if I tried to take notes. I’m not sure how sprocket does it - - so bottom line, if you want exact details and detailed quotes - - definitely read T&T, I don’t know how she follows along and gets so much of the exact testimony. (I CAN'T DO IT!!!! :scared: ) That being said, what I can do - - is give you my impressions and some general overall feedback of what took place in court yesterday. (and FYI: I unfortunately missed the Dr Herold testimony that was held 1st, out of the presence of the jury).

Dr. Lakshmanan, the L. A. County Chief Medical Examiner & Coroner was on the stand all day and is still being crossed by Ms Do. He has been LA CO Chief ME for the past 17 years, but has been an L.A. CO ME and coroner for the past 32 years. To me it appeared that the only reason the defense had called him as their witness was to show that his entire dept (that Dr L is in charge of) showed BIAS, never even considering suicide as a possible option, because the Sheriff’s dept had believed from day 1, that it was a homicide. Dr. L was actually a VERY GOOD witness for the PROSECUTION. Although DW kept pounding away at that point, Dr L explained in detail what process the ME dept went thru in order to determine the “manner of death”. And that the DA office, Sheriff’s dept, etc are totally separate entities and he is not influenced or associated with them what-so-ever. DW spent so much time asking basically the same questions to him, over and over again with very little variation – in order to get Dr L to admit to 2 basic points:

1. That intra oral gunshot wounds are almost always suicide – and therefore the ME dept should have definitely done a “psychological autopsy” (and the fact that they didn’t, verifies that they were in fact, BIASED).

2. That the coroner’s dept had been advised that the Sheriff’s dept was treating this case as a homicide (which created bias) and therefore their dept should not consider or explore the possibility of it being a suicide (and therefore their dept never considered suicide as a possibility).

(IMO - DW failed completely at convincing anyone that this was the case.)

During Dr L testimony he was adamant that this was definitely NOT the case. That the DA, Sheriff’s dept, Police dept, etc - - ALL THE TIME come in with certain “views” about “manner of death”, that is why his dept is a completely separate entity and are governed by the L.A. Board of Supervisors and not in any way associated with these other depts., for this very exact reason. IMO Dr L did NOT come across like a Stuart James (paid) witness. He did not appear rigid, biased, one-sided, nor did he keep repeating pat answers. He was very detailed and kept stressing the point that the ME/coroner NEVER make presumptions about the manner of death. No matter how obvious it seems. He gave several examples of specific deaths that appeared to be either suicide or homicide, but ended up being the opposite. One relevant example he gave was about someone being killed by a SHOT TO THE BACK OF THE HEAD . . conclusion – you’d immediately think HOMICIDE. He explained that thru the ME examination (which includes several areas – not just autopsy), they determined it was in fact a suicide (I believe he said he has actually personally reviewed 61 separate BACK OF THE HEAD GUNSHOT WOUND deaths, and 57 were determined Homicide, but 4 of them were determined to actually be, surprisingly, Suicides). I thought this point helped the jury to understand how much importance the ME/coroner dept placed on “Not Jumping to Conclusions” – that it was part of their basic foundation and responsibility of this job, as coroner/ME, to never assume or make a determination of death until ALL the necessary steps that they were trained on, were 1st explored. Dr L was very vocal about explaining certain FACTS in this case that lead to the ME dept concluding, independently, that the “manner of death” was HOMICIDE. I will list some of the STEPS he discussed on the stand in the next post - - -this is getting too long.

[Spectorfan8]

Thanks for your report My 2 Cents.
From reading the blog, it looks like Donte', Mr. Spector's son was there today. I should have said, one of his sons.

Great job!!

SF8

[My 2 Cents]

DR. LAKSMANAN TESTIMONY (continued):

Here are some of the steps that the Chief Medical Examiner, Dr Laksmanan testified to that took place (and into account) BEFORE determining "manner of death" for Lana Clarkson. He also stated that a "MANNER OF DEATH" that was determined to be labeled as HOMICIDE, simply meant to their department, "Death by the Hands of Another". Their dept is not the one determining who this "other" is. Just that the death was determined to be by the hands of another. These are some of the items that were taken into consideration, for Lana's death, in concluding it was a Homicide:

• LC killed in STRANGERS house and NOT ALONE (he said this was very unusual for a suicide. Usually ALONE – even if in a separate bedroom and someone is in another part of the house. Almost always ALONE). And said very strange that it was at the house of a person she had just met, hours before.
• No note left behind
• A witness saw the gun in the suspect’s hand, after Lana was already dead
• Witness heard PS state, “I think I killed somebody” and while holding gun and had some blood on his hand
• LC was IMMEDIATELY paralyzed, IMMEDIATELY KILLED based on the damage and location of the gunshot wound. She would NOT be able to move, to cry, to gasp a last breath or to exhale. So the fact that the gun had been WIPED down was another factor that pointed to homicide and not suicide. LC could NOT have done it.
• Blood spatter on the suspect’s jacket
• The purse hanging off the deceased’s shoulder. Dr L was very animated when he talked about this point. He said this was EXTREMELY UNUSUAL, Very, Very ODD. He said, “We have NEVER seen that in a SUICIDE”.
• They spoke to mother regarding LC (had she ever threatened suicide before, ever tried to commit suicide before. Was she ever or at time of death severely depressed. Was there something traumatic in her life recently, etc) He did state on the stand that Mrs Clarkson had mentioned that LC was slightly depressed following her 2 broken wrists, but that was awhile ago. She seemed positive and excited since her wrists had mended. (When questioned by DW about “some depression” mentioned by Mom after she had broke both wrists – Dr L stated strongly and animated that this was to be expected and that EVERYONE from time to time has bouts of depression. He stated, “Gee, I even have times when I’m depressed. Do I ever consider suicide. Heck No. Of course not. Most people never do.”)
• Their dept reviewed LC medical records and medical history for signs of depression, or red flags for a suicide - - nothing. No mental illness, no major depression. No previous threats of suicide. No previous attempts at suicide.
• They took into account toxicology results. DW pounded home that LC was “SO INTOXICATED” and this could have changed her state of mind, and committed suicide. PLUS he said, she had a bunch of vicodin and even benadryl in her system. Dr L testified that he didn’t consider her that intoxicated (.12). Without knowing her tolerance level that number can be very misleading. He said that level of intoxication certainly wasn't at a level of impairment that was cause for concern of committing suicide (I'm paraphrasing). And he stated that the vicodin (.07) and benadryl (.1 or .01) amounts were very, very small. Dr L then stated that any vicodin in her sytem would actually have the opposite effect of contributing to any state of depression. (I thought that was an interesting little "tid-bit".)

Dr L stated that he/they did do a type of "psychological" investigation, but it was not what their department refers to as a "Psychological Autopsy". He stated that he did NOT do a "Psychological Autopsy" NOT BECAUSE THE DA OFFICE or SHERIFFS DEPT told him not too do one (which he stated they did NOT tell him any such thing, they have no jurisdiction over this), but based INDEPENDENTLY based on HIS OWN CONCLUSION, the CORONOR's and ME Dept CONCLUSION that this was in fact, a HOMICIDE and NOT a SUICIDE. (I'll list later what and when a "psychological autopsy" is done or considered.)

NOTE: When Dr L spoke about the PURSE being found over Lana's SHOULDER/ARM . . . He was sooo ANIMATED and genuinely SHOCKED by this piece of knowledge and then went on to emphasize how EXTREMELY UNUSUAL this was. In his 32 years as a ME and having been personally involved in 1,000s and 1,000s and 1,000s of autopsies (I forget the number, but the L.A. Co Coroner website states that they perform approximately 7,000+ autopsies a year and over 19,000 deaths a year) . . with so many unusual circumstances - YET he has NEVER seen this with a suicide victim. His testimony was very "real" and the specific examples he used to help make the points he was making - - where very convincing to me. And he came across as a very HONEST and extremely KNOWLEDGIBLE witness IMO.

FYI: Dr L was VERY, VERY DIFFICULT TO UNDERSTAND. I was in court for one of the days ADS testified. Dr L made ADS look like he was qualified to be an ENGLISH/SPEECH Teacher. OMG - - the court reporter had to interrupt, time and time again and have him repeat what he was saying. (AND YET . . . I bet NO ONE WILL accuse Dr L of not understanding what he SAW or HEARD, etc. based on his HEAVY, HEAVY ACCENT, . . . will they?)

[nanouk]

Thank you so much, My 2 cents, for these excellent postings!!!

Nanouk

[hiitsme]

Your posts and reports are great and always so informative. I love your bolded statement. This type of testimony, in my view is something a jury can understand and relate to. As you mentioned, the clinical, classroom testimony of Stuart James appeared very technical and specifically unrelated to Lana's death. Will you post about the cross?

[My 2 Cents]

Thanks for your report My 2 Cents.
From reading the blog, it looks like Donte', Mr. Spector's son was there today. I should have said, one of his sons.

Great job!!

SF8

YES, SF8 - Donte was in court up thru the lunch break. He was sitting on the defenses side of the room and he was with a young man (maybe late teens or early 20s - but I'm horrible with ages). My 1st thoughts were that this young man might be a Donte's son - - but I don't even know if Donte has a son or kids. (Gary, a little help here - - ???)

Donte mentioned to PS's bodyguard that he was hoping to get a picture with PS, but knew that camera's where a concern - could they maybe get one taken outside of court. The bodyguard was very happy to do that - explaining that outside of the courthouse was no problem. I happened to notice that at the start of the lunch break - PS and this young man took a picture in front of PS "NEW" car (Dealer plates still on it) - - Donte was taking the picture. After the picture, PS hugged both men and got in his car and drove away- but when PS hugged each of them Good-bye, I couldn't help but notice that it appeared to be a "real" and "loving" hug - - by that I mean, not stiff, quick hug, but lingering and as if it really meant something to BOTH parties. (Just my thoughts as I was walking to my lunch destination.) I also thought it seemed sad that Donte and this young man didn't go to lunch with PS. I don't know if they were invited, but according to T&T blog, Donte never goes to lunch with PS, nor anybody else. I have seen PS walk out of the court house at lunch several times with "friends" and "visitors", they never get in the car and leave with PS, just him, RS and driver)

RE: "New" car - - No Mercedes today with the "I (heart) Phil" license plate. Not even a Mercedes. It was a black (with LIMO tint on ALL side windows, including driver side - which is illegal in Calif) LEXUS - the smaller RX model I believe. Not the SUV size, the smaller "cross-over" vehicle. It didn't look like the typical PS type car, that is for sure (and definitely too "soccer mom-ish" for RS . . .even if it is an upscale type "soccer mom" car. But definitely I do not see it as Chelle's car - no.

[Spectorfan8]

YES, SF8 - Donte was in court up thru the lunch break. He was sitting on the defenses side of the room and he was with a young man (maybe late teens or early 20s - but I'm horrible with ages). My 1st thoughts were that this young man might be a Donte's son - - but I don't even know if Donte has a son or kids. (Gary, a little help here - - ???)

Donte mentioned to PS's bodyguard that he was hoping to get a picture with PS, but knew that camera's where a concern - could they maybe get one taken outside of court. The bodyguard was very happy to do that - explaining that outside of the courthouse was no problem. I happened to notice that at the start of the lunch break - PS and this young man took a picture in front of PS "NEW" car (Dealer plates still on it) - - Donte was taking the picture. After the picture, PS hugged both men and got in his car and drove away- but when PS hugged each of them Good-bye, I couldn't help but notice that it appeared to be a "real" and "loving" hug - - by that I mean, not stiff, quick hug, but lingering and as if it really meant something to BOTH parties. (Just my thoughts as I was walking to my lunch destination.) I also thought it seemed sad that Donte and this young man didn't go to lunch with PS. I don't know if they were invited, but according to T&T blog, Donte never goes to lunch with PS, nor anybody else. I have seen PS walk out of the court house at lunch several times with "friends" and "visitors", they never get in the car and leave with PS, just him, RS and driver)

RE: "New" car - - No Mercedes today with the "I (heart) Phil" license plate. Not even a Mercedes. It was a black (with LIMO tint on ALL side windows, including driver side - which is illegal in Calif) LEXUS - the smaller RX model I believe. Not the SUV size, the smaller "cross-over" vehicle. It didn't look like the typical PS type car, that is for sure (and definitely too "soccer mom-ish" for RS . . .even if it is an upscale type "soccer mom" car. But definitely I do not see it as Chelle's car - no.

i read that this young man was a friend of Donte's. Donte' is only in his thirties....I think.
maybe the Mercedes was with Rachelle or this could be his new ride.

[dref99]

My 2 cents

A great picture of the day - I can see Dr L talking from your description - thank you so very much. The item summary of the reasons for a homicide are just wonderful - the whole thing seems to highlight for the jury they only have one decision to make suicide vs homicide & the list given is very clear.

I still think accident would have been the better defense - but who knows what a jury may think.

jmo

[nanouk]

My 2 cents

A great picture of the day - I can see Dr L talking from your description - thank you so very much. The item summary of the reasons for a homicide are just wonderful - the whole thing seems to highlight for the jury they only have one decision to make suicide vs homicide & the list given is very clear.

I still think accident would have been the better defense - but who knows what a jury may think.

jmo

Who knows what a JUROR may think... Remember #10? But let's keep our faith in Justice....

Nanouk

[KathR]

In-Session is asking for I-Reporters to send videos about what trials are being covered. Do they mean discussed here or shown on In-Session on TV? I don't watch that anymore. It isn't really coverage. Don't even know if they are covering new trials anymore.

I guess they'd like Sprocket to sport a video camera and report on Spector to them. LOL.

I'm still lurking here and rooting for the prosecution. I'd sure love to be watching this. I enjoy Sprocket's blog, but by the time I've read it I'm not really anxious to re-read the events here. Sometimes though I read this board first and skip Sprocket, so keep up the good work, everyone. :thumbsup: Special thanks to My 2 Cents.

[KathR]

Wow, I just read on T&T about my Sister on the Stand.

She never ceases to amaze me.

She claims she moved out of my fathers house while still living with him :confused: Must be a creative writing technique.

Also, she claimed our father is 69 because he was born on Dec 26th 1939. Sorry, He was born, December 26, 1940. Check what ever reference you want on that. My father will be 69 this year.

I was born in December too. It's amazing how many people can't do age math correctly if the current day of the year is less than the subject's birthday.

[wasapi]

Donte was taking the picture. After the picture, PS hugged both men and got in his car and drove away- but when PS hugged each of them Good-bye, I couldn't help but notice that it appeared to be a "real" and "loving" hug - - by that I mean, not stiff, quick hug, but lingering and as if it really meant something to BOTH parties. (

For some reason this part of your post made me feel incredibly sad. I had to choke back tears.

But thank you for your excellent posts and observations, My 2 Cents. They are truely a good read.

[GPSpector]

In reference to whom my brother Donté brought to Court, I have no clue. As to details about his family, I feel that I am not at liberty to give that kind of private information.

Regarding my brother's age, Donté was born March 23, 1969.

[GPSpector]

For some reason this part of your post made me feel incredibly sad. I had to choke back tears.

But thank you for your excellent posts and observations, My 2 Cents. They are truely a good read.

I was surprised to read that he was not able to get a picture of him with our father. I am glad I was able to get one the last time I saw our father, back in 1999. It is something I will treasure.

[kennedy06]

Nicole may have opened Pandora's box about other personality traits of Phil Spector.

Could the prosecution now call the other Spector children in Phase 2?

What did she say that you may have heard or read that brought you to this conclusion?

I came across a very nice article from 2005 on D. M. It was related to the topic of her faith. From the title of the link it was a faith based publication possibly . Though I'll respect her privacy here and not link to it I will say, it notes she gave up her job with JR to go back to CA to care for her dying mother. This had to have taken place after her fathers death in 1998.

JMO

[kennedy06]

My2 cents thank you, I'm impressed with your coverage! The purse on the shoulder has played a role in my thoughts that she didn't commit suicide or dance around or whatever. That says I'm leaving, waiting to go. Something a man wouldn't think of when possibly cleaning up a situation.

To Constance if you are still reading here thank you for letting us know about that forensic show on the recently closed thread. The one about the suicide then turned murder, when the blood spatter mist was examined on the husband's shirt later on. I wish I would have caught it when it was shown. Thanks

[My 2 Cents]

Dr Laksmanan on stand – Observation about WEINBERG (part 3)

I wanted to share an observation I had re: Weinberg:
(Previously when I was in court, I did not observe the same extreme behavior by DW, that he displayed Tuesday.)
I’ve thought about a better way to say this – but I really can’t come up with anything, other than just saying this - - - What a pain in the A@#.

Seriously, he is soooo annoying. Not in a loud, IN YOUR FACE WAY, more like a slowly dripping drop of water, “plop”, “plop”, “plop” – but right between your eyes, over and over (like the “water torture” cliché) . He was constantly interrupting Ms Do with objections, which it seemed, 99% of them were “over-ruled” objections. But it seemed so distracting to the prosecution team, any momentum or train of thought and DW was stopping it cold with what seemed to me as ridiculous objections, over the tiniest things. And then when JF over-ruled the objection, DW never respected and let it go. He always would restate the objection slightly. Or just keep going on in drawn out statement saying the exact same thing. JF and Ms. Do have the patience of a saint. JF would calmly state to DW, “I understand your objection, but disagree. I understand your argument, but disagree. Objection over-ruled. Let’s move on.” (I really would like to have a $1 for every time Judge Fidler had to say this – and he didn’t say it with each objection, just the times DW kept arguing about it and would NOT take the “over-ruled” ruling without further arguing his point) I can’t decide if this is part of what makes him a great attorney – certainly he is getting objections in and the reasons for them, so it is “on the record” to be used or attempted to be used for an APPEAL. That seems smart – if the evidence you have to work with, for your client, is very weak (and IMO, DW doesn’t have a lot to work with), then try to set up your options for appeal, allowing your 68 – 69 year old client more time outside of prison.

But I must say, even the jury was showing signs of being visibly annoyed. Ms. Do who is very calm and professional, at one point let out an audible noise after one of the many, many repetitious objections (and by many, over and over - - I mean, Ms Do starts a question – doesn’t even finish the sentence – DW objects. Ms. Do starts talking and after 1 or 2 SENTENCES, DW objects, and so on, and so on). She mistakenly let out a “SHeeeshh”, kind of sound – which is NOT her style. She is very professional, no rolling of eyes, doesn’t interrupt the defense’s questions, etc. BUT, IT WAS OVER-SHADOWED, by something even more surprising at the exact same time she did that, - - - by ONE OF THE JURORS making an EVEN LOUDER, “Oh Geeeshhh” sound. . . a Juror. I think the juror might have been embarrassed that they accidentally let out that sound – heard throughout the entire courtroom – no doubt about that. I chuckled under my breath - - when the jury is doing that – take a clue Weinberg – they are annoyed by your behavior and they are no longer paying attention to what your objection is – they think you are being unprofessional and quite frankly, coming across as a “whiny little brat”. Near the end of the day, when Ms Do was so worn down by all this (and I’m guessing, when she thought the objections were getting even more ridiculous and without any merit), she would just drop her arms to her side, with her jaw literally hanging open and stare speechless at JF. . . for a second or two. Finally, she started to verbally OBJECT to DW’s objection. I was like this. DW: “I object . . . blah, blah blah” TD: “Your Honor, I OBJECT” (even louder) She did that twice that I recall. She was getting ticked (to say the least). At one point, no matter how Ms Do worded a question to Dr. L, DW would object. JF finally jumped in and said, “I’m going to interrupt and ask a question. Having heard all that are you still quite confident regarding your determination of the manner of death?” Dr. L answered YES and DW did not jump in and object to JF’s question (but I’m sure he wanted too). Then JF said, “OK, proceed” (I found that exchange very amusing. I doubt the attorneys did). You could tell JF was really trying to remain cool and wasn’t happy with how long DW was making this cross exam take, simply due to DW’s interruptions, or how unfair he was being to Ms Do’s cross and concentration. JF kept telling DW how tiny and minor these items were that DW kept objecting to. And if he had a problem with it, he could clear them up during his redirect.

[kennedy06]

Thanks again!

Yesterday was the the 3rd, did it seem to be noted in anyway you could tell by anyone or just the feeling in the courtroom?

[kennedy06]

I did not mean to mislead. I read here or on a blog that Nicole was asked more about Phil Spector in this trial than the first trial. IIRC, In the 1st trial, she was just asked if PS was left or right-handed.

Oh I see, No problem!

:)

[dref99]

I think you have answered your own question My 2 cents

When you are attempting to defend, what appears to many, to be indefensible, there are not alot of options. Confusion and legal arguments/appeals may be all that is available.

In the last trial JF was caught out once by this process - during the creation of the jury instructions - after much debate and argument he accepted a jury instruction coined by Riordan, who may appear at the same time again, and who will no doubt be the appeal lawyer in this case.

JF is not going to be caught again. I think this is why he gives Weinberg so much leeway.

The prosecution have to find legal ways to combat him - objecting to the objection would seem a good idea - except that it also slows the pace & causes one to lose track of the argument.

Weinberg, despite his own actions, will complain bitterly if the prosecution use body language and gestures to show their concern with his approach. I don't think he can attack the jury for any sounds made in frustration.

Thank you so very much for your insights - almost as good as being there :smile:

jmo

[kennedy06]

Some may think of the term guiltyindeed. when they are posting about this case. Just thought I would mention it. I don't see it used much lately.

:sad:

:confused:

[dref99]

Hi Kennedy

I like hearing about the evidence and discussing it - I think almost everyone made up their minds on guilty/innocent during trial 1.

I don't think the defense is getting anywhere fast this time around, from what I have read, but I do think they are better than the previous defense - which seemed to generate issues that had no bearing on the trial at all.


jmo

[My 2 Cents]

Dr Laksmanan – CROSS by Truc Do 2/3/09

Ms Truc Do, not AJ, handled the CROSS of Dr Lakshmanan. She is good, but neither DW or TD are AJ - - he is in a category all by himself IMO. I really enjoy watching him interact with a witness, whether on DIRECT or CROSS.

Ms. Do is however, very good. She doesn’t rush and she doesn’t get flustered if the witness doesn’t answer exactly as she expects - - she just restates the question in a different, more clear way and she seems to then get what she set out to learn from the witness. She also restates and almost “bullets” the testimony from her witness, so it is very clear to the jury what has been said. I believe this was especially important today because of the constant interruptions – mid cross – from Mr Weinberg.

2 of the favorite things she did (IMO), that I thought were very effective were the following:
• Ms. Do brought out 2 very thick books, written by Dr. Vincent DiMaio (remember him? Ms Do made sure the jury knew he was an important defense witness in the 1st trial). She opened up the books and had Dr L testify to an important focus in both books regarding the 3 IMPORTANT STEPS that a ME/Coroner must take to DETERMINE THE MANNER OF DEATH: (in a “nutshell”)
1) Scene investigation
2) Autopsy
3) Blood Stain Analyst, Toxicology, DNA, Laboratory results, etc.

Which Dr L had already testified to under DIRECT, that they had done all of these and MORE and come to the determination it was a homicide. However, Ms Do went thru each STEP (i.e. – SCENE INVESTIGATION) and had Dr L state the information from this area that they used to determine HOMICIDE. Basically, bulleting the information in an orderly fashion. Then, what it was from the AUTOPSY that pointed them in the direction of HOMICIDE.

During the AUTOPSY step – Ms Do had Dr L state right off the bat that “THE MAJORITY OF INTRA ORAL GUNSHOT WOUNDS ARE USUALLY SUICIDE”. She then said, “If 95%-99% of INTRA ORAL GUN SHOT WOUNDS ARE SUICIDE are you going to close the book and rule it a suicide?” Dr L laughed, and said NO, absolutely NOT.” She then asked him, based on 32 years of experience, in INTRA ORAL SUICIDES, what is the TRAJECTORY angle of the bullet? “Toe-to-Head Angle” or a “Horizontal Angle”? Dr L stated it is usually always “Toe-to-Head” angle in Suicides. He explained why, people usually point gun up at roof of mouth or towards brain, etc. She then asked what the trajectory of Lana’s bullet was. Dr L stated HORIZONTAL.. Ms Do also brought out 3 articles written by the ME Board & Pathologist something or other (they seemed well known and important to Dr L), they were called: UNEXPECTED HOMICIDES – INTRA ORAL GUNSHOT WOUNDS. The articles discussed cases with a HORIZONTAL path for bullet (like Lana’s), and that they ended up not being a suicide, but an "UNEXPECTED HOMICIDE". This is when Dr L also brought up the example of the BACK OF THE HEAD GUNSHOTS (that you’d expect to be homicide, but was determined to be suicide), that I mentioned before.

Ms Do was very effective at getting the jury to understand what was being said, putting the testimony in very understandable, easy to follow along order and that even though it's unusual for a INTRA ORAL GUNSHOT WOUND to be a SUICIDE, that it was JUST AS UNUSUAL for the TRAJECTORY OF THE BULLET IN A SUICIDE TO BE "HORIZONTAL", as opposed to the VERY COMMON "Toe-to-Head" angle found in most suicides.

(I'll continue the CROSS on another POST - this is getting too long)

[My 2 Cents]

Dr Lakshmanan CROSS by TRUC DO (continued - 2nd part)

During the 3rd STEP (blood analyst, lab results, etc) that Ms Do had Dr L testify to, she presented MY 2nd FAVORITE part of the CROSS. She discussed the blood on Lana’s WRISTS, via a VIDEO from the 1st trial. FYI: Apparently when Dr L's secretary typed up the different reports from the different criminologists, coroner, etc – all the people that report to Dr L – the secretary made some sort of error on Jamie Lintemoot report (I think it involved using the word HAND and NOT WRIST) when describing the blood on the back of Lana’s wrist area (and the use of the terms OUTER and INNER don’t really clarify things because that could mean Outside edge VS Inner thumb side). Dr L signed off on the typed report and had his employees check it as well and didn’t catch the discrepancy in the typed report VS Ms Lintemoot’s hand written, on-scene report, which had used the words: RIGHT WRIST, RIGHT OUTER WRIST, LEFT WRIST. Never once mentioning HANDS in her report. Well, on DIRECT Weinberg had a hay-day with this and wanted to pin Dr L on this report as being the BOTTON LINE and being the most accurate record of where the blood was on Lana. After all – he signed the report as being correct – in spite of what JL testified to on the stand as to where she said the blood was located on Lana’s wrist. Even though she had Dr L testify that Jamie’s HAND WRITTEN, ON-SCENE REPORT was the more accurate of the two reports, Ms Do played the video of JL testimony from the 1st trial where JL was asked exactly where the blood was located on Lana’s WRIST and she even pointed to the area that it covered. (Ms Do ONLY did this because DW brought this issue up with Dr. L and kept pounding it home that Dr L signed it and had JL check it and how could it not be the TRUE RECORD of what took place, yadda, yadda) Even after playing this VIDEO on this HUGE SCREEN in the courtroom of Ms Lintemoot’s testimony – with her actually pointing to the back of her WRIST AREA (if you were to wave “bye-bye”, the top of the area where your hand & arm bend) AND having JL state on the stand that it was in a 2-3 inch wide circle in that area AND then she makes a CIRCLE motion with her other hand showing the area that had blood on it . . . Weinberg still objects. It was very clear where the blood was on Lana’s WRIST. However, after the video when Ms Do tries to discuss the location on Lana’s wrist DW objects, stating that Ms Do is misstating the location. Ms Do was sooooo annoyed. After all, we ALL just watched the VIDEO TOGETHER, maybe 2 seconds before. The video also zoomed in on JL's hand - it filled most of the screen. DW motions to & circles his hand/thumb area. TD was like, “Fine, can we play the VIDEO AGAIN?” . .. how lame of DW. NOW the JURY gets to SEE and HEAR EXACTLY where JL pointed to AGAIN. (DW should not want that clip replayed). It was also a clear reminder and visual that DW’s numerous OBJECTIONS seem to be without merit. THIS WAS THE OBJECTION THAT RESULTED IN THE LOUD “Geesshhh” SOUND FROM BOTH TRUC AND A JUROR. . . . So, “Play it Again Sam”. Problem Solved. Objection Over-ruled.

Dr L was still on the stand for CROSS at the end of the day. After the jury left, DW wanted to address the court about an objection he had about Dr Herold and her CREDIBILITY. I’m not even sure what he was objecting to exactly. He restated his position 3 or 4 times – in length. Fidler then asked the state if they wanted to respond – neither AJ or TD even said anything - they kind of shrugged their shoulders and shook their head NO (this leads me to think DW was way out of line – the fact that AJ didn’t even mutter a response to protect his position). Then JF ruled and it almost sounded like scolding – He said He was NOT ABOUT to rule that Dr Herold was NOT credible, he found her absolutely CREDIBLE. (Sorry, I don’t recall exactly what DW’s argument was RE: Dr Herold – I was so “brain dead” by then, I couldn’t handle ONE MORE objection.)

[My 2 Cents]

Your posts and reports are great and always so informative. I love your bolded statement. This type of testimony, in my view is something a jury can understand and relate to. As you mentioned, the clinical, classroom testimony of Stuart James appeared very technical and specifically unrelated to Lana's death. Will you post about the cross?

Thanks HIITSME. I just typed a couple posts about the CROSS. I will add a few more "bits and pieces", but this was a lot of the main points - - it just took a lot of time to cover only a few points, because of all the objections from DW.

[My 2 Cents]

For some reason this part of your post made me feel incredibly sad. I had to choke back tears.

But thank you for your excellent posts and observations, My 2 Cents. They are truely a good read.

You are feeling exactly the way I felt when I happened to see it. It was very SAD to me as well. A little heart wrenching. I don't know why - it just seemed like such a sincere and heartfelt hug - that lasted for a couple seconds each -- and to both Donte and this other young man. And then to see PS climb in this brand spanking new expensive car and just drive away, leaving these 2 in the ugly, courthouse parking lot, just seemed sad and unsettling. It really affected me as well.

(I know, I sound SO dramatic - - - but that's how it really felt)

[My 2 Cents]

I was surprised to read that he was not able to get a picture of him with our father. I am glad I was able to get one the last time I saw our father, back in 1999. It is something I will treasure.

No, it wasn't that Donte wasn't able to get a picture with your Dad. He had just asked about getting a picture with this person that he was with and Phil, AND then I happened to see Donte taking a picture off the two of them (but Donte may have had his picture taken too, before that - I just didn't oversee that). Donte certainly would have been able too - they may have even taken a photo of all 3 of them together - I don't know (the bodyguard was there, so he could have easily taken one for them) Or Donte may not have needed a picture because he already has one with your Dad -- it was taken in the hallway, right outside of the courtroom door, on another day - - Rachelle took it of the two of them.

And sorry to bring up my guess on this friend/person with Donte - - didn't mean to pry.

[My 2 Cents]

My2 cents thank you, I'm impressed with your coverage! The purse on the shoulder has played a role in my thoughts that she didn't commit suicide or dance around or whatever. That says I'm leaving, waiting to go. Something a man wouldn't think of when possibly cleaning up a situation.

To Constance if you are still reading here thank you for letting us know about that forensic show on the recently closed thread. The one about the suicide then turned murder, when the blood spatter mist was examined on the husband's shirt later on. I wish I would have caught it when it was shown. Thanks

Yes, and not only a "tell" that Lana was trying to leave, but that when someone is going to hold a gun in their hand(s), point it into their mouth and commit suicide - they don't need the extra distraction of having to balance a shoulder purse on their shoulder while trying to manipulate and angle the gun just right, as to angle it into the mouth - - they would have taken it off their shoulder/arm immediately - thrown it on the ground - whatever. When trying to angle the gun into her mouth it would have been awkward enough as it is - and when moving her arms to perform this task - - what is the 1st thing that would have happened? . . . any women who carries a shoulder purse will testify to this . . . the shoulder strap would have slipped off her shoulder - which would have caused her arm & the gun to be yanked - - - so IMO, she would have ditched the purse. It would have never ended up on her shoulder/arm if she really had meant to commit suicide. IMO

[My 2 Cents]

Thanks again!

Yesterday was the the 3rd, did it seem to be noted in anyway you could tell by anyone or just the feeling in the courtroom?

YES . . .
BOTH Truc Do and Weinberg actually mentioned it. I believe DW mentioned it by accident. He was discussing a report or something that was prepared and dated 2/3/03. He started to say something about it being 6 years ago approximately, and then he sort of stumbled - I had the impression it caught him off guard, and then said, Oh, that was six years ago today exactly wasn't it.

Truc Do purposely mentioned it. She was restating testimony and she said it loud and clear, that it was 6 years ago today that Lana was killed.

MRS CLARKSON: Mrs Clarkson wore a very nice black 2 piece suit (skirt/jacket). But around the neck was a very pretty, light weight (chiffon like material) LEOPARD PRINT SCARF. It almost looked like it was part of the trim around the neck of the jacket - but I think it was a scarf, and the edges tucked neatly into the v-neck of the jacket. I took this as a TRIBUTE to her daughter on the Anniversary of her Death - - Leopard Print - Lana's favorite.

[My 2 Cents]

Dr Laksmanan – “PSYCHOLOGICAL AUTOPSY”

Weinberg had made this such a huge issue – well he finally got his way, and Dr. Lakshmanan addressed WHAT A PSYCHOLOGICAL AUTOPSY is, and WHY THEIR DEPARTMENT DIDN’T DO ONE.

Apparently a PSYCHOLOGICAL AUTOPSY is ONLY done for either a SUICIDE (when a suicide manner of death has been determined AND the family is adamant that it is NOT a suicide) OR in the case where the ME/Coroner is having trouble determining if a death is AN ACCIDENT vs a SUICIDE. However, PSYCHOLOGICAL AUTOPSIES are NEVER done when its been determined that the “manner of death” is a HOMICIDE. (Part of the problem is that these Psychological Autopsies include extensive interviews with family, friends, neighbors, coworkers, etc AND because many of these people are afraid to discuss such a “touchy” topic, the interviews are ALL EXTREMELY CONFIDENTIAL – sealed basically – this way people feel more comfortable expressing the TRUTH. However, if there was a HOMICIDE investigation going on – these statements and records from these people, and possibly needed by the Sherrif or DA, would not be accessible because the Psychological Autopsy would SEAL them, as they’re TOTALLY CONFIDENTIAL.)

The coroner/ME dept doesn’t do the PSYCHOLOGICAL AUTOPSY, they hire independent psychiatrists & psychologists to conduct it. I got the impression that they were NOT done very often.

DW kept hounding Dr L about NOT performing one. And brought up 1 by 1 , if you knew this – would you have done one? If you knew this, would you have done one? Each time Dr L explained NO, because he felt they had gone way beyond determining Lana’s death was a Homicide. They had so much information & evidence that supported Homicide and NOTHING that supported Suicide.

Dr L also explained that a Psychological Autopsy is done IF ALL OF THESE ITEMS ARE MET:
1. A suicide is determined AND then the FAMILY PROTESTS
2. Family is then instructed to PUT INTO WRITING ALL the REASONS they believe it is NOT a suicide.
3. Then he visits the family members. And if his mind has NOT changed as to the manner of death, he sits down with family and explains exactly why he believes it was a suicide. He said this usually is very successful and when the family is explained all the reasons they most often concur and accept it as a suicide.
4. If however, after all this, the family still feels it is NOT a suicide AND (very important “AND”) the Chief ME is not absolutely sure after discussing it with the family, THEN at that point, he orders a Psychologically Autopsy.

So for DW to suggest BIAS because Dr L didn’t order a Psychological Autopsy after his office received one or more of a handful of mild e-mails from Lana’s computer, that weren’t even presented to his dept for more than a year or so after the MANNER OF DEATH had already been determined as a definite HOMICIDE - - just came across as sounding foolish IMO.

[My 2 Cents]

The young man with Donte was in fact his son Donte Jr. I believe it was his first time seeing his Grandfather, yes Phil- I said it “GRANDFATHER.” I think if was nice of Donte to bring his son
and I’m extremely happy that Dad allowed for the pictures, odd to think that one family member needs Phil’s permission to take a family pictures but hay, that’s the way it is and yeah, he could have taken his son and grandson out for lunch. :mellow:

My 2 Cents, I applaud you for your candid, whimsical and very insightful report of the day’s events. To bad your not there everyday, especially on Wednesdays, the day I’m there. Anyway, keep up the
good work.

Thanks Claudius . . . I thought perhaps that I was witnessing something very special. My gut told me it might be Donte's son. It was that "Dad" like, Proud way that Donte acted towards this young man. And he seemed so excited for this young man to meet PS, but even more so, for PS to meet this young man. (Like a very proud Dad, showing off his son, would look.) When Phil came over for the 1st time to meet them - inside the courtroom at the break, . . . PS truly had a genuine Big Grin across his face the entire time he shook hands with both his Grandson and with Donte. It was a really nice moment.

[hiitsme]

After reading every word of your posts, I really think that the prosecution is fine tuning its case through the defense witnesses! Today, Dr. Spitz is on the stand? If the cross is similar to that of PS1, the prosecution again will have the upper hand. I will say that at age 80+, I admire Dr. Spitz' spunk and determination.

[Spectorfan8]

The young man with Donte was in fact his son Donte Jr. I believe it was his first time seeing his Grandfather, yes Phil- I said it “GRANDFATHER.” I think if was nice of Donte to bring his son
and I’m extremely happy that Dad allowed for the pictures, odd to think that one family member needs Phil’s permission to take a family pictures but hay, that’s the way it is and yeah, he could have taken his son and grandson out for lunch. :mellow:

My 2 Cents, I applaud you for your candid, whimsical and very insightful report of the day’s events. To bad your not there everyday, especially on Wednesdays, the day I’m there. Anyway, keep up the
good work.

Thanks Claudius. I didn't realize that Donte had a son. I do think it was wonderful of your dad to do what he did. I just wish the same for you and G.

SF8

[wasapi]

Well, I've got to jump in here before I puke. All this warm, fuzzy cr*p about photo ops with grampa, and wonderful father/son stuff, all in the context of the trial of this despicable murderer is simply too much.

(snipped)

My apologies to his sons for these harsh words, but he stole Lana's life because of his own selfish desires, and forever ruined the lives of so many others. He is nobody to ever be feted, admired or cherished.

JMO

There are few of us here who disagree with you about the fact PS "stole Lana's life". And most everyone here feels great sympathy for Lana's mother, friends and other family members. Even PS's sons, who have stated it more then once and have been a part of trying to honor Lana.

And those sons should not be punished for the sin's of the father. Nor should they be made to feel that they are wrong in wanting/needing cherished moments with the man that happens to be their father.

My young granddaughter said it well recently. "We just love who we love even if it doesn't make sense".

Please don't try to negate what PS's sons feel. They are good and compassionate men. And if they need some good moments to hold on to in reference to their father, that in no way indicates a disregard by them for Lana or her family.

[wasapi]

My 2 Cents,

Please don't think your post was at all innapropriate or disrespectful. You captured a moment that many of us appreciate you for doing so. Thank you.

[GPSpector]

I'm sorry if my post made you puke. . . I sure hope not. :smile:

I had written separately, quite a bit about all the testimony, evidence & courtroom proceedings and I thought I would also share a different encounter that I happened to witness. I did not post this from the perspective of overseeing some "Warm & Fuzzy Grandpa Phil Moment". The was not why I posted it or why I was affected by what I had viewed. I'm not in agreement with other posters who see this moment as something wonderful that Phil did. Quite the opposite. I feel that what Phil did was the absolute minimum that he could have done - take a snapshot with his Son & Grandson and then drive away, leaving them behind in a hot, littered, L.A. parking lot. What I saw and wrote about was meant to be a wonderful reflection on Donte. He seemed quite proud to show off this young man, that was his son (the way we hope ALL father's would be towards their son, but which we know is definitely not the case). Donte's "fatherly" interaction with this younger man is what made me immediately think that it might be his son. It also was a reminder to me of how supportive all 3 of Phil's son's are, in spite of the lousy conditions they were raised under and the "less than fatherly" way that Phil has treated them (based purely on what I have read), both as children and as adults. These 3 men are certainly better people than I ever could be. Phil is a FOOL. To not take advantage of this "gift" his son's are offering him, in the way of a 2nd chance to renew this relationship makes Phil anything but the "genius" he so likes to pretend he is. And that was why I was touched after witnessing this encounter. My post was NOT about Phil, my post was all about Donte (the courageous, loving and respectful individual he appears to be, regardless of what's been thrown at him from DAY 1). I would also like to add, that Gary and Louis impress me the same exact way.

As far as Mrs Clarkson goes - - I believe that as horrible and painful as it must be to lose a child, she is still much "richer" for the 40 years that she shared and appreciated, a loving relationship with her beautiful (inside & out) daughter Lana - than Phil will ever be, regardless of his "wealth". I do NOT mean to diminish her devastating loss in any way, but Phil will NEVER be loved, admired or as "wealthy" as Mrs Clarkson. And I believe Mrs Clarkson knows that. However, Phil will never understand - - therefore he will live out the rest of his miserable life (whether in prison or not) with just himself and these "demons" that he speaks of. Does he deserve even worse? - - I believe so. But I have no say in his fate, if I did - - it would be a heck of a lot worse than prison. . . . IMO

I for one, appreciated the posting and I also understood from which angle you were posting from.

[kennedy06]

No its not, I am referring to the tag line post. There is nothing interesting or great about what has happened on the board today as far as the disagreements. Emotions can run high and deep, there are 2 families involved here.

I enjoyed reading about Donte but, at the same time he just went to court that was all. He's a nice articulate, friendly, kind man. I wish him all the best.

For me to be read a post that reminded me of Lana's mother's pain was also a reminder of why I post.

I have a mind of my own and no one on this board is leading me down any path other than what I decide to believe. Nor do I feel like anyone is leading anyone else. Just opinions being stated and testimony and evidence being reviewed.

[katfish]

I dropped in to see how things are on the Spector thread for this second trial and pay my respects to the memory of Lana. I was happy to learn from a post that Lana's webpage was still accessable, I had bookmarked the livingdoll address and that is no longer valid.
I haven't read back very far, but the last time I checked in there was very little posting. I must say I would have been around sooner had I known there is actual discussion this time around instead of all the fighting...or did I just hit it at the right time.? LOL
My 2 Cents, I commend you on your reporting of the trial, hopefully you will continue to attend. I too am attending hearings for a murder trial that is about to begin and blogging, so I have some appreciation for what is involved....yes, Sprocket has her own brand of reporting and given that she doesn't use shorthand it never ceases to amaze me that she can get so much of the actual testimony...(full disclosure here, I consider her my mentor)...but don't cut yourself short. Because we cannot see the trial firsthand this time around, IMO, it is more valuable than ever to get feedback from more than one set of eyes and ears!
I will be back for more of your reports.:thumbup:
Hope everyone is well!

[Anakerie]

Joe Friday has a post up that makes me want to know MORE about what happened in court today... He says that Werner Spitz was on the stand and apparently "flipped out". According to Joe:
Basically he flipped out on the witness stand, causing Judge Larry Paul Fidler, to ask all parties to remain calm.

I wish Joe would give more details... I also wish that we had more than just bloggers to give us information about what is going on. **sigh**

[tartangirl]

Take a look at what we are missing by not having media attention payed to this trial .....more mayhem from Dr. Werner Spitz....:mad:


http://losangelestrials.blogspot.com/2009/02/phil-spector-trial-dr-werner-spitz.html


I really miss seeing all of this trial...not just this kind of stuff....but really....:lol:


oops...I see someone has already posted about this...staying up anyway...some things just need to be repeated...


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

[kennedy06]

Oh my gosh thats terrible, there must be something in the air today.

[Anakerie]

Take a look at what we are missing by not having media attention payed to this trial .....more mayhem from Dr. Werner Spitz....:mad:


http://losangelestrials.blogspot.com/2009/02/phil-spector-trial-dr-werner-spitz.html


I really miss seeing all of this trial...not just this kind of stuff....but really....:lol:


oops...I see someone has already posted about this...staying up anyway...somethings just need to be repeated...

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




Yes.. Keep your post up, Tartangirl! I neglected to put a link in my post.. lol.. Doh me...

We are missing so much of what is going on this time. From what we're reading from the bloggers and the occasional MSM article, things are somewhat the same, but not the same this time around. I would love to be watching it for myself so I could see and hear what is being testified to this time. It's so frustrating!!

[katfish]

In an earlier post today Joe Friday said that Spitz was sitting in the courtroom before he testified and was asked to leave, instead he headed up to the witness stand....makes ya wonder if he isn't getting a bit on the confused side. I wish Joe gave more detail too he mentioned a catfight yesterday with no follow up. teaser.
Hello Anakerie! Followed a google link to the Caylee thread and realized i was no longer blocked here. LOL!

[Anakerie]

In an earlier post today Joe Friday said that Spitz was sitting in the courtroom before he testified and was asked to leave, instead he headed up to the witness stand....makes ya wonder if he isn't getting a bit on the confused side. I wish Joe gave more detail too he mentioned a catfight yesterday with no follow up. teaser.
Hello Anakerie! Followed a google link to the Caylee thread and realized i was no longer blocked here. LOL!

lol, It's good to see you back in here, Katfish! :thumbsup:

I saw the post you're talking about earlier today... It sounds like Dr. Spitz is having some problems for sure. Joe Friday definitely needs to follow up on the "teasers" he posts... I'm hoping that he or Sprocket will give us more information about Spitz's testimony today! And yes, I want to know what the "catfight" teaser was all about too!

[True2Blues]

Joe Friday has a post up that makes me want to know MORE about what happened in court today... He says that Werner Spitz was on the stand and apparently "flipped out". According to Joe:
Basically he flipped out on the witness stand, causing Judge Larry Paul Fidler, to ask all parties to remain calm.

I wish Joe would give more details... I also wish that we had more than just bloggers to give us information about what is going on. **sigh**


He wasn't acting normally last trial, I can't believe they brought him back. He only wanted to talk about killing calfs and he constantly bickered with AJ, even denying things he'd said earlier and losing track of the questions.

I think he has some problems and shouldn't be testifying for anyone.

[nanouk]

He wasn't acting normally last trial, I can't believe they brought him back. He only wanted to talk about killing calfs and he constantly bickered with AJ, even denying things he'd said earlier and losing track of the questions.

I think he has some problems and shouldn't be testifying for anyone.

I think the same of Michael Baden, Vincent Di Maio, Henry Lee and, on a lesser scale, Stuart James. Opportunistic mercenaries for hire...

JMO

Nanouk

[Spectorfan8]

I do not find anything wrong with Donte wanting his son to have his picture made with his grandfather.
It has nothing to do with the Clarkson's. There is no reason to believe that it does. It was done outside of the courthouse, and if it is the only chance they can get, then use it.

Someone else already posted this, but I share the same feelings. NO ONE on this board sways me to post what I post. My posts are exactly that. No one leads me to post.

SF8

[Juror #9]

I think the same of Michael Baden, Vincent Di Maio, Henry Lee and, on a lesser scale, Stuart James. Opportunistic mercenaries for hire...

JMO

Nanouk

My feelings exactly!!!

[dref99]

No its not, I am referring to the tag line post. There is nothing interesting or great about what has happened on the board today as far as the disagreements. Emotions can run high and deep, there are 2 families involved here.

I enjoyed reading about Donte but, at the same time he just went to court that was all. He's a nice articulate, friendly, kind man. I wish him all the best.

For me to be read a post that reminded me of Lana's mother's pain was also a reminder of why I post.

I have a mind of my own and no one on this board is leading me down any path other than what I decide to believe. Nor do I feel like anyone is leading anyone else. Just opinions being stated and testimony and evidence being reviewed.

With the little coverage available, I enjoy reading all the posts and opinions, I prefer it when views can be expressed without personal animosity towards those who express a view which is contrary to what others think. This board has been appreciative of all and any information and insights since trial 1 ended.

I would like to say thanks to those who do share their knowledge and opinion of events they witness.

jmo

[dref99]

Joe Friday has a post up that makes me want to know MORE about what happened in court today... He says that Werner Spitz was on the stand and apparently "flipped out". According to Joe:
Basically he flipped out on the witness stand, causing Judge Larry Paul Fidler, to ask all parties to remain calm.

I wish Joe would give more details... I also wish that we had more than just bloggers to give us information about what is going on. **sigh**

I find Joe's posts confusing and wonder sometimes from where his information comes. There is mention on T&T of Spitz heading the wrong way to exit the courtroom - otherwise only a comment that most of his testimony related to his CV and he charges the same for both sides in a trial. When it is updated, no doubt any other issues will be detailed.

Joe's further discussion on Dr Spitz may come from here
http://www.med.wayne.edu/wayne%20medicine/wm98/living.htm


jmo

[Joe Friday]

I find Joe's posts confusing and wonder sometimes from where his information comes. There is mention on T&T of Spitz heading the wrong way to exit the courtroom - otherwise only a comment that most of his testimony related to his CV and he charges the same for both sides in a trial. When it is updated, no doubt any other issues will be detailed.

Joe's further discussion on Dr Spitz may come from here
http://www.med.wayne.edu/wayne%20medicine/wm98/living.htm


jmo

I am in the Courtroom...

[tartangirl]

Sometimes it does pay to read these threads in the wee hours of the morning. I wonder if your ears
have been burning lately? You have many fans here and have been a subject for some good posts.

To say that you have piqued our interest is putting it mildly....we are ready for any and all information if you can share it. :wink:

I have no doubt that you are in that courtroom. Your observations are all very real and have a first hand observers quality to them.

Thank you for your good words...we just want more of them..:laugh:

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

[My 2 Cents]

I forgot to mention that while in court Tuesday, PAT DIXON (he and AJ were the 2 attorneys in PS1) was there. He came in and watched a lot of the trial before lunch. He sat in the gallery. I had to do a double/triple/quadruple take to make sure it was him . . . . he looked 10 years younger - at least. He looked like a different person from the guy in court everyday during PS1. He was TAN and so REFRESHED looking . . a few of us teased him at break that he must have been in Hawaii or Palm Springs - and that he sure doesn't look as STRESSED as we remember him from PS1. He laughed and said, "You're Right . . . it's was this case!!!" (He also confirmed the TAN comes from a little SURFING he tries to get in now and then.)

DAN KESSEL was also in court for the afternoon session. He sat with Rachelle.

[My 2 Cents]

I am in the Courtroom...

Joe - Don't leave us "hanging" . . . What happened today regarding the outburst by Dr Spitz?

P.S. - - - Welcome & Thanks for your reports.
Now get back there and finish p-l-e-a-s-e, OR hey - post some tidbits HERE, we're dying to hear.

THANKS :biggrin:

[My 2 Cents]

My feelings exactly!!!

HI and WELCOME Juror #9. :biggrin:

Have you attended any of this trial? Do you see any major differences in the way this trial is being handled VS PS1 ? How does Weinberg VS LKB, RR, Plourd, etc size up?

Of course, if you haven't attended or followed the blog updates, those might be tough questions, eh? . . . what with no TV coverage.

[tartangirl]

Thank You My 2 Cents for your good observations these last few days. I am always happy to hear anything about the very skillful Pat Dixon. That little bit you just mentioned was a nice look into a very good prosecutor's dedication. I miss seeing him and his smooth skills each day.

Heck I guess I miss seeing all of them, because I do...we all do!
Today sounds like it was another example of good courtroom drama and stellar law practiced by Alan Jackson that is lost to media history because of neglect by the MSM. Hmmmm....not good, not good at all. :crying:

Stress must be a constant companion to these fine prosecutors this PS2 each day whether in court or at home on the weekend. Gee, I hope they take some time to have some fun every now and then :rolleyes:

We more than appreciate that complete attention as they continue to serve as advocates for Lana and her family in such a brilliant manor.

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

[dref99]

I am in the Courtroom...

It doesn't make your posts any clearer to understand :confused:

jmo

[kennedy06]

Debate-to exchange views about something in order to arrive at the truth or to convince others. To me I read that as leading, perhaps I’m wrong. ...snipped... Information is leading you. Knowledge is leading you. Common since, well it’s leading some of you.

Thank you, I appreciate you taking the time to respond. I'll admit it took me a couple of times to figure out my paths but, I understand.
***

I would like to say on a side note in general, there is no real information flowing for those that have any sort of interest in this case. Where would you turn besides T & T and another board if you couldn't attend the trial? If anyone connected to lets say a witness, the victim's extended family and friends, the defendant's extended relatives and friends, where are you going to turn to read about it and possibly gauge the jury? Just a thought.

[kennedy06]

I forgot to mention that while in court Tuesday, PAT DIXON (he and AJ were the 2 attorneys in PS1) was there. He came in and watched a lot of the trial before lunch. He sat in the gallery. I had to do a double/triple/quadruple take to make sure it was him . . . . he looked 10 years younger - at least. He looked like a different person from the guy in court everyday during PS1. He was TAN and so REFRESHED looking . . a few of us teased him at break that he must have been in Hawaii or Palm Springs - and that he sure doesn't look as STRESSED as we remember him from PS1. He laughed and said, "You're Right . . . it's was this case!!!" (He also confirmed the TAN comes from a little SURFING he tries to get in now and then.)

DAN KESSEL was also in court for the afternoon session. He sat with Rachelle.

Once again thank you for those observations:smile:

[kennedy06]

I am in the Courtroom...

Hmmm, OK. A little more detail would be nice,:smile: oh and welcome.

[kennedy06]

I was rereading m2c post of 2/4 about the testimony. How did I miss this part. This makes so much sense.

******

From m2c post:

During the AUTOPSY step – Ms Do had Dr L state right off the bat that “THE MAJORITY OF INTRA ORAL GUNSHOT WOUNDS ARE USUALLY SUICIDE”. She then said, “If 95%-99% of INTRA ORAL GUN SHOT WOUNDS ARE SUICIDE are you going to close the book and rule it a suicide?” Dr L laughed, and said NO, absolutely NOT.” She then asked him, based on 32 years of experience, in INTRA ORAL SUICIDES, what is the TRAJECTORY angle of the bullet? “Toe-to-Head Angle” or a “Horizontal Angle”? Dr L stated it is usually always “Toe-to-Head” angle in Suicides. He explained why, people usually point gun up at roof of mouth or towards brain, etc. She then asked what the trajectory of Lana’s bullet was. Dr L stated HORIZONTAL..

[hiitsme]

I was rereading m2c post of 2/4 about the testimony. How did I miss this part. This makes so much sense.

******

From m2c post:

During the AUTOPSY step – Ms Do had Dr L state right off the bat that “THE MAJORITY OF INTRA ORAL GUNSHOT WOUNDS ARE USUALLY SUICIDE”. She then said, “If 95%-99% of INTRA ORAL GUN SHOT WOUNDS ARE SUICIDE are you going to close the book and rule it a suicide?” Dr L laughed, and said NO, absolutely NOT.” She then asked him, based on 32 years of experience, in INTRA ORAL SUICIDES, what is the TRAJECTORY angle of the bullet? “Toe-to-Head Angle” or a “Horizontal Angle”? Dr L stated it is usually always “Toe-to-Head” angle in Suicides. He explained why, people usually point gun up at roof of mouth or towards brain, etc. She then asked what the trajectory of Lana’s bullet was. Dr L stated HORIZONTAL..

I thought the exact same thing when reading this. It is one of only a few explanations that I totally understand and makes perfect sense, as you said. I don't think it was explained so clearly in PS1.

[Rickshere911]

PS1 was a circus. The upside of the lack of media coverage is that the courtroom isn't in the spotlight and hopefully this will allow the jury to do their job and this murderer will spend the rest of his life behind bars where he belongs.

I haven't watched Court TV (the new Tru Tv) since that horrible Star Jones show preempted courtroom coverage. I knew she wouldn’t last long.

Thanks to all who are posting and keeping us informed of whats going on.

[Chelle]

Will Henry Lee testify this time?

[Chelle]

I was rereading m2c post of 2/4 about the testimony. How did I miss this part. This makes so much sense.

******

From m2c post:

During the AUTOPSY step – Ms Do had Dr L state right off the bat that “THE MAJORITY OF INTRA ORAL GUNSHOT WOUNDS ARE USUALLY SUICIDE”. She then said, “If 95%-99% of INTRA ORAL GUN SHOT WOUNDS ARE SUICIDE are you going to close the book and rule it a suicide?” Dr L laughed, and said NO, absolutely NOT.” She then asked him, based on 32 years of experience, in INTRA ORAL SUICIDES, what is the TRAJECTORY angle of the bullet? “Toe-to-Head Angle” or a “Horizontal Angle”? Dr L stated it is usually always “Toe-to-Head” angle in Suicides. He explained why, people usually point gun up at roof of mouth or towards brain, etc. She then asked what the trajectory of Lana’s bullet was. Dr L stated HORIZONTAL..

OMG...thank you for this post. Did they say this in the first trial? If so i don't remember it. no angle.............just HORIZONTAL. Amazing. Thank you again.

[Spectorfan8]

PS1 was a circus. The upside of the lack of media coverage is that the courtroom isn't in the spotlight and hopefully this will allow the jury to do their job and this murderer will spend the rest of his life behind bars where he belongs.

I haven't watched Court TV (the new Tru Tv) since that horrible Star Jones show preempted courtroom coverage. I knew she wouldn’t last long.

Thanks to all who are posting and keeping us informed of whats going on.

I do not believe that many of us watch anymore. You can get more info. from here or a blog or two.
There is always the chance that the jury was doing their job the last time. There is also a chance that he will walk again.:biggrin:

[Chelle]

I do not believe that many of us watch anymore. You can get more info. from here or a blog or two.
There is always the chance that the jury was doing their job the last time. There is also a chance that he will walk again.:biggrin:

again? he didn't walk the first time. it was a hung jury.

[Spectorfan8]

again? he didn't walk the first time. it was a hung jury.

Yes, it was a hung jury....but he still walked right out of the courthouse. Odds are it will happen again.JMO

[wasapi]

Yes, it was a hung jury....but he still walked right out of the courthouse. Odds are it will happen again.JMO

Hi Spectorfan. I am honestly not trying to be confortational, I am just curious.

What are you basing your odds on, that it will happen again?

[RayStar]

I hope not!Yes, it was a hung jury....but he still walked right out of the courthouse. Odds are it will happen again.JMO

[Spectorfan8]

Hi Spectorfan. I am honestly not trying to be confortational, I am just curious.

What are you basing your odds on, that it will happen again?

I understand you're not trying to be confrontational, thank you.

I just do not believe that all jurors will find him guilty. Last trial, everyone was betting on a guilty verdict, except me.
This time he has the same chances....that's all.

SF8

[Spectorfan8]

I hope not!

I guess that the only thing we will agree on is Obama!!! :thumbsup:

[My 2 Cents]

I forgot to mention that while in court Tuesday, PAT DIXON (he and AJ were the 2 attorneys in PS1) was there. He came in and watched a lot of the trial before lunch. He sat in the gallery. I had to do a double/triple/quadruple take to make sure it was him . . . . he looked 10 years younger - at least. He looked like a different person from the guy in court everyday during PS1. He was TAN and so REFRESHED looking . . a few of us teased him at break that he must have been in Hawaii or Palm Springs - and that he sure doesn't look as STRESSED as we remember him from PS1. He laughed and said, "You're Right . . . it's was this case!!!" (He also confirmed the TAN comes from a little SURFING he tries to get in now and then.)

DAN KESSEL was also in court for the afternoon session. He sat with Rachelle.

Sorry, I think I may have misspoke when I stated Dan Kessel was in court Tuesday. I didn't realize the Kessel Brothers were in their early to mid 50's - - this guy was NOT, he was younger. BUT he sure did look like Dan Kessel. So SORRY - "excuse the ring".

[Juror #9]

HI and WELCOME Juror #9. :biggrin:

Have you attended any of this trial? Do you see any major differences in the way this trial is being handled VS PS1 ? How does Weinberg VS LKB, RR, Plourd, etc size up?

Of course, if you haven't attended or followed the blog updates, those might be tough questions, eh? . . . what with no TV coverage.

I was there on day two of the opening statements. I have not been back since. I have not heard Weinberg, but anything is better then the first set of clowns. I can still see LKB blow her cheeks out like a chipmunk and move her hands out in front of her, every time she would mention the explosion of the gun in Lana's mouth and Plourd could put the dead to sleep, and of course, the biggest clown, Bruce Cutler. What memories. I can’t forget Roger Rosen, and his “tight as a watch spring” attitude. Maybe this Weinberg clown is not as entertaining as the previous band of fools and bought and lying experts (juror are not idiots but some of the bull s--t they expected us to believe was just beyond belief - suspend physics and common sense), or the time LKB was "sick" when her husband was testifying (the "Ah Ha" moment), but I think this time Phil Spector will be found guilty.

[My 2 Cents]

I don't know if this LINK has been posted before, but it's pretty cool.
It's a BIRDSEYE VIEW (with ZOOM features) of Phil's "CASTLE". It is such a CLEAR PICTURE of not only the neighborhood, but ALL THOSE STEPS that DeSouza said Lana had to help a drunk Phil Spector stumble up. GOOD GRIEF!!!!

It also gives you an appreciation for how VULNERABLE the arriving officer's must have felt that morning. It's approximately 5AM and ALL these TREES and MASSIVE AMOUNTS of property where Spector could have been located/hiding. You can see the back 4 car garage - where the police stated they had concerns when they 1st arrived, that PS could be there. You can clearly see how far away the gate entrance is, where ADS parked and waited for the police to arrive.

WHEN YOU CLICK ON LINK BELOW, YOU'LL SEE A SMALL PICTURE OF PS "CASTLE". JUST CLICK ON IT AND IT TAKES YOU DIRECTLY TO "INTER-ACTIVE ARIAL VIEW OF PHIL'S PROPERTY AND THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD.

http://www.birdseyetourist.com/?p=643

I find it interesting (after seeing how long & steep these steps are) that Phil always states in interviews that he doesn't care what other people think, yadda, yadda. AND then you see this ridiculous crazy stairway and hear that Phil always insisted that people arrive through this way. And that night/morning - he's drunk, it's 2:30 or 3AM and he still insists that ADS drop them off at the bottom of this endless looking flight of steps. - - me thinks Phil does care and desperately wants to impressive people.

[Spectorfan8]

Odd are the opposite unless you know something we don't. A 2nd trial almost always results in a conviction (based on history).

Why do you think he is NG?

Because I do not believe that he murdered Lana.
The only thing I know is that in this country, people are innocent until proven guilty.

SF8

[Spectorfan8]

Do you think Lana commited suicide? Just curious. :confused:

I do not believe that Phil Spector murdered her.

[Juror #9]

I do not believe that Phil Spector murdered her.

I was a juror on that trial. I heard all the evidence and I know he is guilty.

[Spectorfan8]

I was a juror on that trial. I heard all the evidence and I know he is guilty.

Good, I am glad for you. Especially since your knowledge didn't convict him. JMO

[Juror #9]

Good, I am glad for you. Especially since your knowledge didn't convict him. JMO

I was only one out of 12 but I know this time he will not walk out of the courtroom through the front door . He will leave through the back prisoner exit with handcuffs.

[Spectorfan8]

I was only one out of 12 but I know this time he will not walk out of the courtroom through the front door . He will leave through the back prisoner exit with handcuffs.

Thank you for your point of view.:biggrin:

[Juror #9]

Thank you for your point of view.:biggrin:

You are welcome.

[Spectorfan8]

What do you think happened? Only two people were in the house, and one person died. How did that happen? If you do not want to answer, that is ok.

There are really only two things......

Lana commited suicide or
PS is legally and criminally responsible

Phil Spector is innocent of murder. IMO

[Spectorfan8]

Spoken like an attorney. :crying::lol:

So............. do you think PS has any responsibility? His gun, his ammo, his foyer.

Do you say this because you are a fan of his work?

Spoken like an attorney......I wouldn't know. I am not an attorney.:lol:

I say this because I am Spectorfan8. However, I do enjoy his music, it is some of the best ever made.
I say that he didn't commit murder.

[Spectorfan8]

Spoken like an attorney......I wouldn't know. I am not an attorney.:lol:

I say this because I am Spectorfan8. However, I do enjoy his music, it is some of the best ever made.
I say that he didn't commit murder.


Now, off to dinner with my husband....which I am very glad to have. Mr. Spector is probably getting ready to do the same.:cool:

[kipswife]

:wink:


Manslaughter?


Ok, enough from me. Have a great weekend! :biggrin:

well, manslaughter is not murder....per say. Is it just murder spectorfan is against...what about the manslaughter issue? i dont think he is guilty of 1st degree MURDER but he was there and he caused it to happen. He pulled the trigger, whether he tripped or was pushed.

Juror 9, nice to have you here

m

[vonna]

I was only one out of 12 but I know this time he will not walk out of the courtroom through the front door . He will leave through the back prisoner exit with handcuffs.

From your mouth to God's ears........

[vonna]

Now, off to dinner with my husband....which I am very glad to have. Mr. Spector is probably getting ready to do the same.:cool:

Mr. Spector is probably getting ready to have dinner with his husband?????

[Chelle]

Spoken like an attorney......I wouldn't know. I am not an attorney.:lol:

I say this because I am Spectorfan8. However, I do enjoy his music, it is some of the best ever made.
I say that he didn't commit murder.

but whats your views on what happen that night.

[Spectorfan8]

Mr. Spector is probably getting ready to have dinner with his husband?????

No.....Mr. Spector was probably getting ready for dinner.:rolleyes:

[Spectorfan8]

but whats your views on what happen that night.

I wasn't there that night. I feel it is pretty much like Mr. Spector says it happened, for the most part.

[nanouk]

I wasn't there that night. I feel it is pretty much like Mr. Spector says it happened, for the most part.

I also feel it is pretty much like Spector said it happened when he said "I think I killed somebody" with a bloodied gun in his hand. Manslaughter.

JMO

Nanouk

[Spectorfan8]

I also feel it is pretty much like Spector said it happened when he said "I think I killed somebody" with a bloodied gun in his hand. Manslaughter.

JMO

Nanouk

good for you.

[vonna]

I also feel it is pretty much like Spector said it happened when he said "I think I killed somebody" with a bloodied gun in his hand. Manslaughter.

JMO

Nanouk

Precisely!!!!!

[Jayne]

I do believe there is a lot if misunderstanding and misinterpreting of the laws here.

Bottom line..whether PS is found guilty of M2 or MS..he's essentially going to serve the same amount of time under the court.

J.D. Jack Daniels or Just Dumb or Justifiable Defiant..or a slew of other things..

Phil Spector had a hand in this. If he hadn't..he'd have sent Lana off with his driver before anything got more than before a "head".

Those who love him..who love his music..must know..that he is a "ticking time bomb" when it comes to control. IF he had his wits about him (if he ever did..doesn't seem so from his childrens' posts, etc.)..He'd have had Lana out the door..into the LIMO..and back to her door..BEFORE he lost it. EXCEPT that..he'd done it before. Those witnesses. PBAs. Interesting people. Why did they let it go once or twice? Why didnt' they "report him"? Intimidation..that's it..bottom line. But we all want to sit here and say..OH NO..YOU can't intimidate me. OH YES YOU CAN...if it means a job...if it means keeping up a relationship that I can't afford to lose. BUT...did Lana? I don't think so. Yet..she may well have (OK Mcannie..go for it)..played the "casting couch" thing with him..to TO TO TO a certain point. But NO means NO...and you don't deserve a gun shoved in your face because you said NO.


Get real...in the world as it was then (and is today)..you do NOT diss an employer...someone connected with your employer..unless you have BACK UP. Read the state rules..unemployed...discriminated against..and more.

Maybe I'm not remembering..but weren't ALL those PBA's somehow..at some point connected with PS as employees of him or his connections? Well..maybe one...What was the glue that kept them silent? This new jury, I hope sees this..maybe many of them have been in similar situations..but did the "jury questions" didn't ask that? they should have, imo.

jmo

j

[Chelle]

I wasn't there that night. I feel it is pretty much like Mr. Spector says it happened, for the most part.

so you agree with him that he killed somebody?

[dref99]

Hello Jayne

Even if it wasn't an employer/employee relationship between PS and all the women who spoke about him in court, there appeared to be an unequal power relationship. Although many watching the trial last time around had never heard of him, it certainly seems that he had some power in the circles in which he moved.

From what I read then - apologies no recent links - he was also inclined to sue people who did not act as he wanted. It was mentioned by at least one that you need alot of money to continue a legal fight against Mr Spector. This seems to be true in the criminal case at the minute.He has spent much money on this case and the prosecution must have spent large amounts of money as well.

It will be interesting to see what happens to the current civil cases outstanding - the ones I know of relate to Shapiro, the hotel mentioned earlier and the Clarkson family

jmo

[dref99]

Some detail on the testimony of Dr Spitz

http://sprocket-trials.blogspot.com/2009/02/phil-spector-retrial-day-thirty-nine.html

There seems to be much discussion on payment. Does anyone know how many experts would be available in this area? Why would the defense use Dr Spitz? and why does it cost so much? His fees are quoted at $5000 per day - is that the norm?

tia

[RayStar]

I guess that the only thing we will agree on is Obama!!! :thumbsup:
This thread is about an old man who will be proven GUILTY of murdering a young beautiful woman. Stay on topic

[Spectorfan8]

This thread is about an old man who will be proven GUILTY of murdering a young beautiful woman. Stay on topic

No, this thread is about the current trial. I say he is not guilty. What anyone else says does not matter to me.:w00t:

[Auburngirl]

Juror 9, nice to have you here

m

Respectfully snipped...

Echoing Kips welcome to you, Juror 9! It's great to have you here. I wish the retrial were being carried by someone. I used precious vacation time to stay on top of the first trial.

[My 2 Cents]

WOW . . . I for one, am so thankful for the detail and pure volume of "T&T"s blog about Thursday's courtroom happenings. How she gets all that down is beyond me. If you "lurk" here sprocket - THANK YOU.

That said . . . I sure wish I had been there to see that testimony. I would have LOVED to watch the look on Weinberg's face as the defense's highly paid expert and KEY witness came across not only as extremely BIASed and one who has NOT viewed the forensic evidence with a FAIR and OPEN MIND, but as an "expert" who is clearly beyond his "prime" and previous capabilities. "Senile" seems too severe of a word, but it appears that age has taken it's toll and his capabilities have been diminished to the point that this man should not be testifing as a forensics "expert" anymore. The fact that Phil has paid this man $141,000+ for this bumbling testimony is shocking. Surely everyone, especially the defense, must have seen this TRAIN WRECK coming after how poorly his testimony came across in PS1. Why Weinberg would not have made sure that Dr Spitz was a little more prepared before taking the stand is puzzling. However, Spitz comes across as so extremely arrogant, certain he'll "sail right through his testimony" based solely on the fact that he is the AMAZING Dr Spitz (hiding behind credentials & 52 years in the business as this "celebrity" pathologist, so to speak), that I believe Weinberg probably had his hands full trying to educate this a$$ on his obvious pitfalls from PS1. And to be so argumentative and hostile on the stand with such "lame" responses (NO,NO,NO!!! . . . wait, wait, wait, oh ya - YES) - surely threw out any hope that even a single juror would give this guy's testimony any "weight" - at least not for the defense. (Spitz wandering up towards the witness stand the day before, after the Judge had asked him to take a seat outside in the hallway, most certainly didn't help.)

If this testimony had been televised, I would be convinced that this "expert's" $5,000 per day fees just got greatly DISCOUNTED, and he may find himself spending the remaining years of his career spent lecturing at Universities, . . . at a much reduced rate. HOWEVER, fortunate for Dr Werner Spitz, this trial was NOT televised, and his embarrassing testimony will not be replayed, over and over again on "YouTube", under the heading: FORENSIC "BLOOPERS" HALL OF SHAME.

[My 2 Cents]

I was there on day two of the opening statements. I have not been back since. I have not heard Weinberg, but anything is better then the first set of clowns. I can still see LKB blow her cheeks out like a chipmunk and move her hands out in front of her, every time she would mention the explosion of the gun in Lana's mouth and Plourd could put the dead to sleep, and of course, the biggest clown, Bruce Cutler. What memories. I can’t forget Roger Rosen, and his “tight as a watch spring” attitude. Maybe this Weinberg clown is not as entertaining as the previous band of fools and bought and lying experts (juror are not idiots but some of the bull s--t they expected us to believe was just beyond belief - suspend physics and common sense), or the time LKB was "sick" when her husband was testifying (the "Ah Ha" moment), but I think this time Phil Spector will be found guilty.

Thanks for your comments and feedback #9. It is reassuring to know that the "bought & paid for" expert testimony and the testimony that seemed to contradict the basic "laws of physics", did not go unnoticed in the jury room.

I sure welcome ANY "tidbits" (or "chunks" :biggrin: ) and insights you are comfortable sharing on this PS thread. I hope you'll check in often.

[Jayne]

Spitz-Borge..

Oh..how he amused me in PS1...

http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=victor+borge&emb=0#

ok..that's Victor..

but that first trial...that was Spitz! I nearly lost my stitches listening to him on the stand..

gotta love those bovines, huh?

(you know..bovines...calves being shot in the head? never mind the chicken running around with their heads cut off)

jmo

[nanouk]

It appears Dr. Spitz has been practicing medicine about 56 years. Would that put him in his 80s?

Spitz was born in 1926, that would make him 82 or 83:

http://www.laweekly.com/2007-08-02/columns/phil-noir-spattered/

I thought he was much older... For a while, there was a rumor that he had attended Abraham Lincoln's original autopsy...

Who else is supposed to do a comeback in PS2? Eyebrows Di Maio? Ahah Baden?

JMO

Nanouk

[My 2 Cents]

Spitz-Borge..

Oh..how he amused me in PS1...

http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=victor+borge&emb=0#

ok..that's Victor..

but that first trial...that was Spitz! I nearly lost my stitches listening to him on the stand..

gotta love those bovines, huh?

(you know..bovines...calves being shot in the head? never mind the chicken running around with their heads cut off)

jmo

YES, Spitz & Borge - Good Catch, but whereas Victor is FUNNY, I am afraid that Sptiz is now just SAD (although much to the regret of the defense, he is DEFINITELY STILL ENTERTAINING & actually quite FUNNY as well).

RE: Victor - I have always liked that thing he did with the "Inflation" of WORDS, Language . . . something like that. Very funny AND clever!!!

[nanouk]

Here is something I just read at the address I just posted above (Steven Mikulan, L.A. Weekly):

"Ironically, Spitz’s testimony in a Michigan cold murder case helped convict a man last year of shooting his wife in the head — a 1998 case that had first been ruled a suicide. Among other things that convinced Spitz of the husband’s guilt was the fact that women usually don’t shoot themselves in the head."

Mercenaries for sale to the highest bidder... and 141,000$ can buy you a lot of BS!

JMO

Nanouk

[My 2 Cents]

Spitz was born in 1926, that would make him 82 or 83:

http://www.laweekly.com/2007-08-02/columns/phil-noir-spattered/

I thought he was much older... For a while, there was a rumor that he had attended Abraham Lincoln's original autopsy...

Who else is supposed to do a comeback in PS2? Eyebrows Di Maio? Ahah Baden?

JMO

Nanouk

Interesting article that you linked to Nanouk - Thanks. In it, it mentions a case that Dr Spitz testified to which resulted in a conviction. Read below regarding one of the PIECES of EVIDENCE that helped the "Doctor of Death", Spitz come to the conclusion that this was NOT a SUICIDE, but a HOMICIDE:

"Ironically, Spitz’s testimony in a Michigan cold murder case helped convict a man last year of shooting his wife in the head — a 1998 case that had first been ruled a suicide. Among other things that convinced Spitz of the husband’s guilt was the fact that women usually don’t shoot themselves in the head.")


H-m-m-m-m . . . how curious.

[My 2 Cents]

Ha, ha, ha NANOUK, . . . We most have BOTH been reading that article at the SAME TIME. We had a simultaneous "Ah Ha" moment. :laugh:

[RayStar]

:thumbsup:The old man will be found Guilty as Charged! YIPEE

[Jayne]

YES, Spitz & Borge - Good Catch, but whereas Victor is FUNNY, I am afraid that Sptiz is now just SAD (although much to the regret of the defense, he is DEFINITELY STILL ENTERTAINING & actually quite FUNNY as well).

RE: Victor - I have always liked that thing he did with the "Inflation" of WORDS, Language . . . something like that. Very funny AND clever!!!

You know Victor was Danish..he visited Solvang several times..LOVE that Man..SUCH a MUSICIAN and comedian! IMO..he makes Spector look like a wannabe musician..who never made it..he "just produced" people to HIS advantage. Not to downgrade his productions..they were Great, btw.

you're right..Spitz can't come up to that..but there was a comparison I just had to comment on back in PS1..when you weren't here and how now when you are.

I think...let's see...a Borge interpretation...

alphabet instead of numbers.

I think I killed someone

OK...J uijol J ljmmffe tpnfpof

I don't think anyone could interpret that, could they? cept me..cause I figured it out by Borge..

[RayStar]

It appears Dr. Spitz has been practicing medicine about 56 years. Would that put him in his 80s?Yes he is up there and I hope I reach that age. He was highly respected here in Wayne County MI as his son is in Macomb County MI.

[NYGalPal]

Spoken like an attorney......I wouldn't know. I am not an attorney.:lol:

I say this because I am Spectorfan8. However, I do enjoy his music, it is some of the best ever made.
I say that he didn't commit murder.

You have continually ignored all the facts of the case that points to his guilt because you like his music? OK

:thumbdown:

[NYGalPal]

No, this thread is about the current trial. I say he is not guilty. What anyone else says does not matter to me.:w00t:

Thanks for pointing out that you don't care about the evidence and just praying you are right because you like his music. That is sad. :glare:

[wasapi]

Wow, it seems in my absents, a lot has happened.

Just so you guys (and gals) know, I was thinking that this entire thread was "accidentally" deleted since I was no longer able to see it under my old name "GPSpector". (snipped)

;-)

How interesting. Well, welcome back GPSpector!

[hiitsme]

Yes he is up there and I hope I reach that age. He was highly respected here in Wayne County MI as his son is in Macomb County MI.
Having been hired by these high profile defense attorneys he has, no doubt, had a successful respected career. I guess after hearing his testimony, now in both trials, I wonder why he didn't bow out when he was at the top of his game, so to speak. I believe his "expert" testimony has hurt the defense.

[Spectorfan8]

You have continually ignored all the facts of the case that points to his guilt because you like his music? OK

:thumbdown:

No, I have not ignored the facts.OK?
The fact is that he has not been found guilty. The fact is that he is innocent until proven guilty. Those are the facts.OK?
Another fact is that yes I do love his music.

I do not care how you feel about it, or anyone else. Everybody has an opinion, whether you like it or not. That is another fact.:lol:

[Lyndawitha"Y]

No, I have not ignored the facts.OK?
The fact is that he has not been found guilty. The fact is that he is innocent until proven guilty. Those are the facts.OK?
Another fact is that yes I do love his music.

I do not care how you feel about it, or anyone else. Everybody has an opinion, whether you like it or not. That is another fact.:lol:


Oh...Spectorfan8..I have enoyed reading your postings..and undying belief the Phil will once again be free as a bird...cause you believe he is innocent....cause he is innocent until or is indeed found guilty...right?

Now my question to you is..just out of curiosity.....will you concede his guilt if found gulty?..or will we hear such things as "Not Proven"?..I havent read in your postings just what evidence you hang your hat on that prove innocence..so just wondering...I am sure Phil would be thrilled to know there are some people out there who believe his gun didnt kill Lana by his hand..

LMS:blush:

[My 2 Cents]

Did anyone else (that read "T&T" notes about Thursday's trial) find it INSULTING and CROSSING the LINE, that Phil Spector had the b@!!$ to cart the book, DOUBT into the courtroom? (I believe it stated that he had it sitting with him at the defense table IIRC.)

I am surprised he was not advised by the courts to place it out of view from the jury. What is the difference between that and wearing a button or perhaps a tasteless TEAM SPECTOR t-shirt into the courtroom IMO?

Ol' Phil thinks he is so clever and SO much smarter than every single person in that courtroom.

And I don't mean just because the title suggests the term "DOUBT". He specifically selected that book, NOT ONLY because of the title, but because of the CONTENT of that play (story). IMO Phil is trying to COMPARE HIMSELF to, what he perceives as, the persecuted priest Father Flynn. And on this "stage" which takes place in Courtroom 106, I guess Sister Aloysius would then be played by AJ (or more specifically the State), doing what she felt necessary to protect this "CHILD". One of the exchanges in the play/book between the two; FF (played by Phil), "You have no PROOF" to which Sister A (played by AJ) replies, "I have my certainty".

SPOILER ALERT - PLEASE DON'T READ THIS IF YOU DON'T WANT TO KNOW an IMPORTANT LAST LINE OF THE PLAY/BOOK or a DISCLOSURE made by a main character in the play/book:

I'm sure the message Phil hoped to convey to the JURY could probably be captured in the scene where Sister Aloysius, during her campaign to destroy this priest, confesses her DOUBTS to another Nun, about her ALLEGATIONS and ASSUMPTIONS . . . AND confesses about LIES she told in order to uncover and then share, all she could about THIS MAN's PAST. (And please don't think this scene outlines or sums up the direction of the play)

I imagine however, that PHIL would primarily be interested in HIGHLIGHTING the LAST SCENE of the play/book, and SHARING that point with the JURY:
Sister Aloysius, sitting on a bench in a garden relaying to Sister James, "I have DOUBTS. I have such DOUBTS."

Interesting FOOTNOTE Phil: MANY do NOT think this means the Sister doubts this man's guilt, but is actually doubting her faith, for believing in a God that would allow men with this kind of POWER to prey on young, innocent victims.

And IMO . . There is NO BOOK or PLAY on this Earth that would have you playing the role of a "father". There are many books that might "parallel" your situation, but DOUBT is NOT one of them.

[Spectorfan8]

Wow, it seems in my absents, a lot has happened.

Just so you guys (and gals) know, I was thinking that this entire thread was "accidentally" deleted since I was no longer able to see it under my old name "GPSpector".

I had received a PM confirming from a friend that it was still around. I tried to contact CW through E-Mail and PM's but with no reply after a few days, I thought I'd try to create a new account just to see what happens.

So, with absolutely no clue as to what happened, I am here and with a new name amongst my friends again.

Well, I've got a lot of reading to do ;-)

Well, I for one am glad that you are back.:biggrin:

[kennedy06]

Thank you for that great post my2cents! When I read about it all I could think about what was recently in the news about Casey A. The purple bracelet that was for Caylee. This bracelet was put into her clothing (sock) by whom ever on the outisde prepared her clothes for her to wear to her hearing but, the jailers found it first. I listened to the news shows as many discussed they thought it may have sent a subliminal message also. So then then we hear he has the book Doubt sitting in front of him.:huh:

I would hope it was all just a coincidence.

Even if he was truly interested in the book and its meaning, it was quite a title to be in front of the jury, after all the title of the book Doubt was on the defense side of the table!

[Spectorfan8]

Oh...Spectorfan8..I have enoyed reading your postings..and undying belief the Phil will once again be free as a bird...cause you believe he is innocent....cause he is innocent until or is indeed found guilty...right?

Now my question to you is..just out of curiosity.....will you concede his guilt if found gulty?..or will we hear such things as "Not Proven"?..I havent read in your postings just what evidence you hang your hat on that prove innocence..so just wondering...I am sure Phil would be thrilled to know there are some people out there who believe his gun didnt kill Lana by his hand..

LMS:blush:

I will say this, if he is found guilty I will be posting about other things on other threads. After this trial, guilty or not, I do not think there will continue to be a Phil Spector thread.
I will always be a Spectorfan8 though.

I hope that this answered your question. Thank you for being kind..:smile:

[My 2 Cents]

Well, I for one am glad that you are back.:biggrin:

I 2nd SF8's comment. "Ditto" Gary.

[My 2 Cents]

Did anyone else (that read "T&T" notes about Thursday's trial) find it INSULTING and CROSSING the LINE, that Phil Spector had the b@!!$ to cart the book, DOUBT into the courtroom? (I believe it stated that he had it sitting with him at the defense table IIRC.)

I am surprised he was not advised by the courts to place it out of view from the jury. What is the difference between that and wearing a button or perhaps a tasteless TEAM SPECTOR t-shirt into the courtroom IMO?

Ol' Phil thinks he is so clever and SO much smarter than every single person in that courtroom.

And I don't mean just because the title suggests the term "DOUBT". He specifically selected that book, NOT ONLY because of the title, but because of the CONTENT of that play (story). IMO Phil is trying to COMPARE HIMSELF to, what he perceives as, the persecuted priest Father Flynn. And on this "stage" which takes place in Courtroom 106, I guess Sister Aloysius would then be played by AJ (or more specifically the State), doing what she felt necessary to protect this "CHILD". One of the exchanges in the play/book between the two; FF (played by Phil), "You have no PROOF" to which Sister A (played by AJ) replies, "I have my certainty".

SPOILER ALERT - PLEASE DON'T READ THIS IF YOU DON'T WANT TO KNOW an IMPORTANT LAST LINE OF THE PLAY/BOOK or a DISCLOSURE made by a main character in the play/book:

I'm sure the message Phil hoped to convey to the JURY could probably be captured in the scene where Sister Aloysius, during her campaign to destroy this priest, confesses her DOUBTS to another Nun, about her ALLEGATIONS and ASSUMPTIONS . . . AND confesses about LIES she told in order to uncover and then share, all she could about THIS MAN's PAST. (And please don't think this scene outlines or sums up the direction of the play)

I imagine however, that PHIL would primarily be interested in HIGHLIGHTING the LAST SCENE of the play/book, and SHARING that point with the JURY:
Sister Aloysius, sitting on a bench in a garden relaying to Sister James, "I have DOUBTS. I have such DOUBTS."

Interesting FOOTNOTE Phil: MANY do NOT think this means the Sister doubts this man's guilt, but is actually doubting her faith, for believing in a God that would allow men with this kind of POWER to prey on young, innocent victims.

And IMO . . There is NO BOOK or PLAY on this Earth that would have you playing the role of a "father". There are many books that might "parallel" your situation, but DOUBT is NOT one of them.

Here's a suggestion Phil: Leave DOUBT at home on Monday, and instead bring, I DID IT :read:

[kipswife]

I 2nd SF8's comment. "Ditto" Gary.

same here, 2 cents...but it seems someone else has a different opinion and it was a mistake.

t and t was great reading by the way. she must know shorthand to keep up with it so well

m

[wasapi]

I can't recall the name of the book (though a whole TV series came from it), but it was a true case involving a man who was wrongly imprisoned for murder, though he continued to insist that a one-armed man had been the actual murderer.

In my opinion, I believe that bringing that book into the courtroom would be just as innapropriate as bringing the book "Doubt" with him. And it is difficult to understand why the judge didn't notice and comment. (I apologize if he did and I am just unaware of it.) It just always appears that the defendant feels different rules of conduct and decorum apply to him.

[RayStar]

Having been hired by these high profile defense attorneys he has, no doubt, had a successful respected career. I guess after hearing his testimony, now in both trials, I wonder why he didn't bow out when he was at the top of his game, so to speak. I believe his "expert" testimony has hurt the defense.I have no answer for you. All I know in Wayne county he was respected and I live in Wayne County. I am surprised after PS1 he is here for PS2. His is son is well liked in Macomb County MI also.
Your post is a good one.

[My 2 Cents]

:lol: BOO...........

Am I missing something here? Are you "laughing" at this poster, GSpector? . . and BOOing the fact that he is back???

He is a respectful poster and contributor to this forum. And I find it extremely offensive that you would "attack" him like this. I don't care if you are a Grandma.

And MY SINCERE APOLOGIES IF I HAVE MISUNDERSTOOD YOUR POST. I truly hope that I have and that I am the one in error.

Let's "play nice" on this thread and not "attack" the individual posters. Especially those who have always posted respectfully. Thank you.

[Jayne]

I can't recall the name of the book (though a whole TV series came from it), but it was a true case involving a man who was wrongly imprisoned for murder, though he continued to insist that a one-armed man had been the actual murderer.

In my opinion, I believe that bringing that book into the courtroom would be just as innapropriate as bringing the book "Doubt" with him. And it is difficult to understand why the judge didn't notice and comment. (I apologize if he did and I am just unaware of it.) It just always appears that the defendant feels different rules of conduct and decorum apply to him.

OMG..I loved that show...

the actor is dead...I think...

It was "The Fugitive"

[My 2 Cents]

I can't recall the name of the book (though a whole TV series came from it), but it was a true case involving a man who was wrongly imprisoned for murder, though he continued to insist that a one-armed man had been the actual murderer.

In my opinion, I believe that bringing that book into the courtroom would be just as innapropriate as bringing the book "Doubt" with him. And it is difficult to understand why the judge didn't notice and comment. (I apologize if he did and I am just unaware of it.) It just always appears that the defendant feels different rules of conduct and decorum apply to him.

Are you talking about "The Fugitive"? With ???, David Janseen maybe? He played a guy called Richard Kimble chasing the "one-armed bandit" to prove his innocence throughout each episode. . . is that the show?

I think it was based on the real life murder of a military officer's wife and family. Sam Shepard possibly?? I believe in real life he said "hippies" did it or something like that ???

[My 2 Cents]

OMG..I loved that show...

the actor is dead...I think...

It was "The Fugitive"

Jayne - - you must be a faster typer than me. ha, ha

[Jayne]

Jayne - - you must be a faster typer than me. ha, ha


yeah yeah..140 wpm SORRY! :)

[My 2 Cents]

Just an inside joke. Did you miss CW's post?

Yes I read it. That is why I thought it was an inappropriate post.

I apologize again, if I have misunderstood.

[My 2 Cents]

yeah yeah..140 wpm SORRY! :)

I guess that does beat me - - I use TWO fingers and it's about 10 -20 wpm, . . . if I were BRAGGING that is. :laugh:

[Jayne]

I guess that does beat me - - I use TWO fingers and it's about 10 -20 wpm, . . . if I were BRAGGING that is. :laugh:


WHOAH..I'm not bragging...

you brought it up

:)

it's not a good thing...mind you..on a resume...then they expect you to do twice or thrice the amount of work in a normal day.

I just type fast....and play fast..know the Clarinet Polka! :)but heck that arthritis is kicking in...probably I'm down to half.

email me...about..UKW.

[My 2 Cents]

WHOAH..I'm not bragging...

you brought it up

:)

it's not a good thing...mind you..on a resume...then they expect you to do twice or thrice the amount of work in a normal day.

I just type fast....and play fast..know the Clarinet Polka! :)but heck that arthritis is kicking in...probably I'm down to half.

email me...about..UKW.

ha, ha, ha - - NO, you misunderstood .. . I was trying to say that the 10-20 wpm was probably EVEN an EXAGGERATION (i.e. . ."bragging" - meaning I was the one BRAGGING) on MY part . . . my actual typing skills are probably LOWER, say - 7-15 wpm. ha, ha (I hope that I actually type a little better than the originally 10-20 that I posted - but my point was I'm a "pecker" at the keyboard (and I have to look at it while I type too). I am BAD.

Sorry everyone - - I keep going Off Topic. :blush: (and now every knows I truly can not type)

[kennedy06]

Are you talking about "The Fugitive"? With ???, David Janseen maybe? He played a guy called Richard Kimble chasing the "one-armed bandit" to prove his innocence throughout each episode. . . is that the show?

I think it was based on the real life murder of a military officer's wife and family. Sam Shepard possibly?? I believe in real life he said "hippies" did it or something like that ???


And we come full circle to LKB, she was on a tv program (Today)being interviewed about the CA case and she brought up this wrongfully convicted man. She seem to feel very strongly about it and the government. It gave me a much clearer view of her and how that disposition may have played out in the PS case. I was going to post ealier about PS giving his side of the story. I had never heard him give his side of the story in the actual trial. At least for me to base my opinion about what happened that night, not even a one arm man theory.


JMO

O/T as far as typing LOL I think you are both pretty proficient at your touch typing skills! :smile:

[bearwds]

Maybe the next book to bring to court is "12 angry men".

One man (Henry Fonda) stands up to 11, fighting for innocence (Phil Spector).

Dan-10....oops, Fonda... could argue "the jacket" until all are stark raving mad.

Judge Fidler could take the book away and bonk him with gavel.

SPOILER ALERT

Defendent gets off.


bearwds

[nanouk]

Someone on the pro side could create some form of counter-balance by bringing to court

WITHOUT A DOUBT

http://www.amazon.com/Without-Doubt-Marcia-Clark/dp/0670870897

JMO :rolleyes:

Nanouk

[kennedy06]

Maybe the next book to bring to court is "12 angry men".

One man (Henry Fonda) stands up to 11, fighting for innocence (Phil Spector).

Dan-10....oops, Fonda... could argue "the jacket" until all are stark raving mad.

Judge Fidler could take the book away and bonk him with gavel.

SPOILER ALERT

Defendent gets off.


bearwds

That movie was unforgettable but I do have to have faith in LE and DA that they did take the time to review the evidence before PS was charged. I don't know if the movie Hud starring Paul Newman was ever a book but, I will never forget what the Father in that movie said to his nephew (from what I could find on the internet as I also remembered this sentence):

....little by little the face of the country changes because of the men we admire. You're just gonna have to make up your mind one day, about what's right and what's wrong."

I have compassion for PS and for the pain he has felt in his life but there is a right and wrong on how you treat people. I don't believe the women that testified were not telling the truth. There is a right and wrong even if alcohol is involved. So that lead us to that night with Lana. I wonder if he was ever told holding a gun to a woman's face (witnesses) or pulling it out around men (stories not allowed in) or mistaken admirers (as DW mentioned) was wrong by anyone or did they just admire him and keep quiet?

[kennedy06]

G or GP (senior member!) either way I'm glad you came to the board too.

[kennedy06]

Reviewing the testimony by Dr. S on T & T. the whole turning Lana and the bruise like marks on her wrist. To me if that was a common problem when well, turning people on the autopsy table (I hate to even really mention that) I think there would have been instant references to that about others of the similar weight, height or bigger that were turned.

[kennedy06]

G, Interesting yes! Especially after reading the vivid account of Dr. S and his testimony the other day in court. It makes me wonder what AJ has ready for any other experts the defense may call.

[hiitsme]

Seems a bit quite here today.

I look forward to reading about what happens in Court tomorrow. Always seems interesting

Me too! I'm curious as to the findings of the fountain expert or whatever you call him. Was the jury tour to take place this coming week?

[Rickshere911]

That movie was unforgettable but I do have to have faith in LE and DA that they did take the time to review the evidence before PS was charged. I don't know if the movie Hud starring Paul Newman was ever a book but, I will never forget what the Father in that movie said to his nephew (from what I could find on the internet as I also remembered this sentence):

....little by little the face of the country changes because of the men we admire. You're just gonna have to make up your mind one day, about what's right and what's wrong."

I have compassion for PS and for the pain he has felt in his life but there is a right and wrong on how you treat people. I don't believe the women that testified were not telling the truth. There is a right and wrong even if alcohol is involved. So that lead us to that night with Lana. I wonder if he was ever told holding a gun to a woman's face (witnesses) or pulling it out around men (stories not allowed in) or mistaken admirers (as DW mentioned) was wrong by anyone or did they just admire him and keep quiet?


If in ps1 "Team Spector" has 145K to throw out on one paid witness he could have gotten to the Jury and her very "Best" friend.

[Jayne]

Interesting article that you linked to Nanouk - Thanks. In it, it mentions a case that Dr Spitz testified to which resulted in a conviction. Read below regarding one of the PIECES of EVIDENCE that helped the "Doctor of Death", Spitz come to the conclusion that this was NOT a SUICIDE, but a HOMICIDE:

"Ironically, Spitz’s testimony in a Michigan cold murder case helped convict a man last year of shooting his wife in the head — a 1998 case that had first been ruled a suicide. Among other things that convinced Spitz of the husband’s guilt was the fact that women usually don’t shoot themselves in the head.")


H-m-m-m-m . . . how curious.


Holy cow (pun intended - from PS1)...

Women USUALLY DON'T SHOOT themselves in the head! Yeah...they usually take an overdose, don't they? Maybe slit their wrists? Drown in a pool?

I'd choose the overdose..quiet, serene, no real pain, no blood, and leaves that pretty little (or old) face intact. Wouldn't that be the reason why that statement..usually don't shoot themselves in the head?

But, know what? I think women are stronger in a sense than men are (In several ways), yet they have a certain sense of "dignity"..IF...one can say a suicidal person has dignity..I don't know. I still can't shake the "feeling/intuitiveness" as a female, as well, that if Lana wanted to "go"..she'd have gone like her Idol..MMonroe...all soft in that bed surrounded by MM's photos and whatever else she wanted to have near her at the time..NOT by putting a colt revolver inside her mouth and lodging a bullet in her spine. But...yes, I may be wrong...as may many of us who feel/think/intuit the same thng.

As a kid..yes...and many of you may have as well but wouldn't admit to it... used to sit and talk with my childhood friends...one, in particular, was the daughter of our minister. We'd contemplate that "forever" "eternity" thing...then we'd talk about if we had to die...HAD TO (I'm not talking suicide..but about a choice thing...religion attached a bit..but can't say it here...but Easter might ring a bell)..we knew nothing about drugs..Marilyn Monroe hadn't died as yet and even if she had we wouldn't probably have known about it...Our "choices" were...fire, drowning, car accident, being shot (NOT shooting ourselves), stabbed, crucified, etc. Bottom line...we wouldn't have chosen to die. But..if it did..we were both girls (to be women)..we wouldn't let anyone else be hurt by it...and it would have to come at the hands of another person. Strange, huh?

Lana's death may have been an "accident"..but I do not think it was her's. TG I am not on that jury, I suppose.

jmo

[Jayne]

In this trial, I am concerned with Juror 5. He is the one who dresses casually and has worn various pop icon Tshirts to jury duty (Sun records, perhaps Easy Rider and the like).

Could he be a closeted fan of the 50s/60s era? Hopefully coincidence.

He well could be just what you said.

He well could have some dollars he won't account for?

I don't know...but with that kind of display it does make me (and you..and others) wonder.

BTW..I do like Easy Rider..but that doesn't change my opinion of "dressing for jury duty"

jmo

[kennedy06]

Geesh I never thought about that. That is why I like posting with you guys, the little details or different ways at looking at things, that just fly by me but, so many of you pick up on!

[kennedy06]

I can understand every ones passion on each side. Well..... that tune was written by an innocent teenage boy about his father that committed suicide. I think that came from the heart, you know. (I say it nicely)


I dont know if you knew that but well...you were creative.

[kennedy06]

I guess you could say, Phil Spector's life started because of suicide and might posibly end because of suicide (not his of course)

Trust me I have thought about that. Is that where the idea of suicide came from, you know? I've said it to many times but I still think with that interview with Mick B., memories had to have been stirred in him, then with everything else we heard about I just wonder what was going on in the back of his mind that night. JMO

[kennedy06]

I see, Yes you think it would, hmmm. So many different angles to all of this.

[Spectorfan8]

This needs some work

To know, know, know him is to loathe, loathe, loathe him
Just to see him smile, makes him seem more vile

To know, know, know him is to loathe, loathe, loathe him
To know, know, know him is to loathe, loathe, loathe him
Just to see him smile, makes him seem more vile
To know, know, know him is to loathe, loathe, loathe him
And I do

It'll be good for him, It'll bring peace to him
Everyone says there'll come a day when Satan will walk alongside of him
Yes, just to know him is to loathe, loathe, loathe him
And I do

Why can't he see, how blind can he be
Someday he'll see that he was not meant to be
To know, know, know him is to loathe, loathe, loathe him
Just to see him smile, makes him seem more vile
To know, know, know him is to loathe, loathe, loathe him
And I do

Why can't he see, how blind can he be
Someday he'll see that he was not meant to be

To know, know, know him is to loathe, loathe, loathe him
Just to see him smile, makes him seem more vile
To know, know, know him is to loathe, loathe, loathe him
And I do

To know, know, know him is to loathe, loathe, loathe him
Just to see him smile, makes him seem more vile
To know, know, know him is to loathe, loathe, loathe him
And I do
And I do

It'll be good for him, It'll bring peace to him
Everyone says there'll come a day when Satan will walk alongside of him

Why can't he see, Yes, just to know him is to loathe, loathe, loathe him
And I do

This song was written by a young Phil Spector in memory of his father, who killed himself.
He was showing his love for his father. Not a very funny post.

[kennedy06]

If you think about everything that was going on with him at the time, you might understand how that night came to be. It was within that time (2003) that Starsailor (sp) fired him from producing his first album in many years. It was also around that time that Paul MaCartney striped the Wall of Sound from the Let It Be album and called it Necked. I think, and this is only my opinion and not a fact, that “Phil Spector’s” pride was hurt but at the same time the article by Mick Brown boosted once again his ego, making him feel on top of the world, feel important again. It think “Harvey Spector” needed to be “Phil Spector” that night since he had put that image behind him for many years. He became a recluse and put drinking to the side. He raised his daughter by becoming a father, but then with Starsailor and MaCortney stripping him of his pride, he had to once again come out of recluse to become the man he once was, “Phil Spector- record producer” and with that the drinking started and the guns came out. I also think that the “Accidental suicide” came from his father as he never really wanted to believe his father purposely committed suicide. Then again, that's just my thoughts.

Sorry for my overposting everyone.

I also read in TDW of S by MB page 408, that he and Nancy S. had broken up between Christmas 2002 and the date of the shooting. So......well for what it is worth. I don't know if that was a big deal to him or not. JMO

[Spectorfan8]

The song was written by Harvey Phillip Spector, Ben Spector's son. Phil Spector turned it into profit.

It still doesn't give the poster any credit for an uncaring post. Phil Spector is the name he used as a producer, after he had it legally changed. Right?
He still wrote the song for his father.

[wasapi]

It still doesn't give the poster any credit for an uncaring post. Phil Spector is the name he used as a producer, after he had it legally changed. Right?
He still wrote the song for his father.

For what it's worth, I agree with Spectorfan8. And I know from personal experience that losing a parent at an early age can leave a hole in the heart that never seems to get filled. I have always associated that song with as close as PS was able to come to making himself whole again. His tradgedy however need not lessen the tradgedy of Lana's death.

[Spectorfan8]

For what it's worth, I agree with Spectorfan8. And I know from personal experience that losing a parent at an early age can leave a hole in the heart that never seems to get filled. I have always associated that song with as close as PS was able to come to making himself whole again. His tradgedy however need not lessen the tradgedy of Lana's death.

I agree to agree with you. It doesn't lessen the sadness of Lana's death.

I would never have written anything hateful about Lana just because I am Spectorfan8.

[tartangirl]

Pain is just a part of life.

We learn from our sadness and move forward toward a better life.

There are no excuses for how HPS has treated people and continues to treat people to this day.

Taking responsibility for what happened on February 03, 2009 is the first step HPS needs to take in finding his own truth.


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

[Spectorfan8]

He still killed Lana Clarkson IMO. It is not an uncaring post. You have your opinion, I have mine. I have sympathy for the 8 year old Harvey, but ZERO for the 69 year old Spector.

Regardless of how fans feel, Spector will be remembered not for the wall of sound, but as the musician who killed Lana Clarkson.

Many children lose parents at an early age, but life goes on.... 99.9% of those children become stronger and more caring because of the tragedy.

For PS, it just became another chapter in his pathetic life. He still can turn his life around, but he must first accept the fact that he, and he alone, is responsible for the death of Lana, His gun, his house, his crime. MHO.

That's odd because the eight year old boy didn't write the song. The young man Phil Spector wrote the song.

How do you know that he, and he alone are responsible for Lana's death? No one else was in the house, but Phil and Lana.

[tartangirl]

Pain is just a part of life.

We learn from our sadness and move forward toward a better life.

There are no excuses for how HPS has treated people and continues to treat people to this day.

Taking responsibility for what happened on February 03, 2009 is the first step HPS needs to take in finding his own truth.


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



I had to leave and just came back to see my error...too late to correct it...it should read...

Taking responsibility for what happened on February 03, 2003 is the first step HPS needs to take in finding his own truth.

I may have made a mistake in typing but my thoughts are strong and clear on this one...that is certain.

[Spectorfan8]

common sense... it is not rocket science....
To each his own!!

[tartangirl]

There are many, many people who suffer tragedy in their childhood. It doesn't make them mean, brooding , "need to get even" control freaks!
HPS should have been seen for what he was when he hired bodyguards to keep people away from his lonely table at his High School reunion because he felt ignored in school.

BTW, I agree with Paul McCartney, it sounded better once the "wall" was torn down!


I have to agree with you. Just think of all that could be out there from a working, able to move with the times music producer right now if HPS had only been able to deal with his demons?

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

[Jayne]

Phil utters 'I think I killed somebody'
911 is not called by PS
The crime scene is altered <Did a dead Lana do it?>
PBA. Those who forget history are likely to repeat mistakes.
No past history of suicide attempts of deceased.
Purse on shoulder.
Angle of trajectory.
Door locked/bolted.


absolutely must agree...(I still don't buy the purse thing..but that really doesn't matter..it's just another PLUS! EXCEPT that blood spilled into her purse..NOW there I see the Purse being important..very important...

Had she shot herself...as I see it (but, yes I can be wrong)...that gun would have dropped to her right side. along with her right "dominant" hand...knocking her purse a bit to the side or Back..not getting as much blood into it as it did. and her head would have probably leaned more to her LEFT...perhaps? Seems nobody cared to think about that? Or maybe I missed it? Or maybe my tragectory "stuff" is totally off.

jmo

J

[kennedy06]

Ohhh, I'm right handed, I'm holding a glass, my right hand on first then left hand on to add support and if need apply left thumb to help appy pressure to right thumb. So if I relaxed and I was no longer gripping it, the left hand would leave the glass first then the right hand still on it but hmmm, considering the trigger area maybe holding the thumb in place sort of, and gravity, the right hand would cause it to go down towards the right direction. Excellent point Jayne!

or did I get that wrong?? anyone?

[kennedy06]

You would have the unbending of the elbow at the point of relaxation right? So the weight of the forearm falling??

[Jayne]

You would have the unbending of the elbow at the point of relaxation right? So the weight of the forearm falling??

yes..that's how I see it..but I certainly can be wrong.

That video of the man shooting himself...somebody put it up on these threads in the past year or so...his right arm...fell to his right side...the gun fell pretty much infront but to the right of him...not his left, as I recall.

PS screwed up.putting that gun at Lana's left side. What reasonable juror wouldn't see that? Whether he did it or he didn't (the shooting) he definitely manhandled that gun and placed it there..she surely didn't...it would be near her feet..one side or the other...but not underneath that chair on her left side...that's how I see it..but again I can be wrong.

jmo

J

[My 2 Cents]

That's odd because the eight year old boy didn't write the song. The young man Phil Spector wrote the song.

How do you know that he, and he alone are responsible for Lana's death? No one else was in the house, but Phil and Lana.

You're right SF8, NO ONE ELSE was in that house except Phil & Lana (and when LC died, it was instantly). SO MY QUESTION (this is not directed at you SF8, but at any "NG" believer that is willing to shed some light, ... it would be very much appreciated.

If someone thinks Phil is INNOCENT then I would have to take that to mean they do NOT BELIEVE that DeSouza SAW Phil HOLDING the GUN, minutes after Lana was killed.

SO HELP ME OUT HERE BECAUSE I DON'T UNDERSTAND that type of rationalization. UNLESS they can state some ideas or opinions as to WHY they do NOT trust his statement. Regardless of how thick ADS's accent is or that he speaks multiple languages - - HIS EYESIGHT is NOT in question. We know of NO bone he has to pick with PS, no bad blood, he actually relied on this part time employer for a job that he appeared to enjoy.

ADRIANO had EVERYTHING to LOSE and NOTHING to GAIN by going to the police. So he appears to be an EXTREMELY CREDIBLE WITNESS. (Are NG people really saying they believe PPie, but have a problem with ADS and what he SAW?)

One thing strongly REINFORCES what ADS says he saw that morning. The fact that the gun used in Lana's death ended up being WIPED DOWN. This is why IMO that bit of info is SO important:

As soon as ADS peeked past PS and saw LANA slumped in the chair . . . he FLED - - FAST. He was in such a panic, he started to run towards the gate, then realized he had a car right there and jumped in that and drove out of there. ADRIANO had NO IDEA what Phil would do after HE LEFT. ADS had NO IDEA that Phil would WIPE DOWN the gun. So IF IF IF IF . . . DeSouza was going to LIE about Phil HOLDING the GUN. He certainly got LUCKY that it happened to get either WIPED down OR that Phil got TAZERED and as a result the gun was KICKED ALL OVER THE PLACE (magically wiping it down in the process). Man, what are the odds?

Because the ONLY way for ADS' story to be VALID is:
(A) Phil's finger prints are on the gun
OR
(B) The gun is wiped down

How LUCKY was that for DeSouza? (And ADS is all the way down at the gate entrance when police arrive. He can not see anything that is going on up at the house or by police or Phil.)

AND if the answer is, "Oh, I do believe he SAW the gun in Spector's hand BUT I do NOT think he heard Spector correctly when he said I THINK I KILLED SOMEBODY". Then OK, that means Phil still HAD TO PLACE THE GUN AT HER FEET because otherwise it would still be IN HIS HAND. Which means police DIDN'T KICK it there, which means PHIL WIPED IT DOWN.

IF someone DIES in YOUR HOUSE, with YOUR GUN and YOU are the ONLY OTHER PERSON in the HOUSE and YOU DO NOT CALL 911 (or "O" operator or police) . . . AND you WIPE DOWN the GUN & the DEAD PERSON's FACE then you need to either: take the STAND and EXPLAIN exactly what happened - or - explain much better EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENED to YOUR ATTORNEY's so they can present this info to the JURY - OR GO TO JAIL. It is that simple. YOU screwed up by NOT calling 911, and WIPING OFF the weapon & and victim's FACE. YOU are not a 2 year old, you are a 62+ year old successful business man. It was NOT prudent to do ALL those things. So get up on the stand and explain why you did or explain it to your defense team because they have NOT explained it, they have only tried to paint the victim as depressed. "Innocent until proven guilty" only goes so far. When Phil contaminated the entire crime scene (which is indisputable and also against the law), he accepted a little more responsibility for explaining what happened.

So PLEASE....ANY "NG" poster, explain why we should NOT believe ADS when he says he SAW the gun in Phil Spector's hand. (I am not even talking about what he HEARD - tell us why we should question what he said he SAW.)

[dref99]

Some people think Lana's death was an "accident". There are very few who are of the opinion that Lana committed suicide.

If it was an "accident" (given that it was surely an accident waiting to happen) then one would expect a call to 911, the gun to be instantly dropped and the driver to be asked for assistance.

If it was "an accident", especially after the events that followed the death of Lana, the smartest thing to do would have been some type of plea - it would have saved everyone involved much grief.

It does seem from past history that PS is his own worst enemy. He made one comment "I think I killed someone" and another "It was an accident, I can explain", both of which are probably as close to the truth as will ever be known.

The "accident" to me is the difference between 1st and 2nd degree murder - He didn't mean to kill Lana, I can just believe. Pointing a loaded gun at her, which then is fired inside her mouth, is taking the word "accident" somewhat outside my reality.

I do believe Lana had no idea that the gun was loaded & thought he was a silly little man with an overinflated ego.

jmo

[RayStar]

Having been hired by these high profile defense attorneys he has, no doubt, had a successful respected career. I guess after hearing his testimony, now in both trials, I wonder why he didn't bow out when he was at the top of his game, so to speak. I believe his "expert" testimony has hurt the defense.
I read about Spitz' testimony and was wondering what has happened to him. I guess his age is showing. I hope I get there. The defense team must not have been able to get anyone else. Spitz was not helpful to PS2. Well, perhaps PS will take the stand and clear up everything.:biggrin:

[tartangirl]

I think the answer you're looking for is "Faith"

Seems the NG's have Faith in Mr PS.

Faith can answer questions that evidence can not.

Your faith is a lovely light delicate
shade and seems to be fading fast right in front of our eyes. Faith has to have some good action to base the feeling on. I fail to see any here.
I admire your attitude. :smile:


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

[tartangirl]

I do not think Casper is a NG. JMHO.

Faith brings back the belief in a higher power, IMO. PS is no god or demi-god. He is a mere mortal. He is no better, smarter than any of us.

He had the money that kept him out of pri$on the last $ix year$. How $ad i$ that? Compare thi$ to the woman who ha$ $pent the la$t ten year$ in pri$on awaiting trial (current ca$e on In $e$$ion right now).

As human beings we tend to believe in the good of all mankind. Until facts show that not to be true. :sad: I have not seen anything by the defense to tell me that this man is innocent.

If HPS had used his power and money to do good all of these years, I would have something to base my faith in him on very easily. He is less than an honorable man. We have the proof of that many times over.


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

[tartangirl]

First of all, to have faith in someone, I believe that particular someone has to deserve it. Someone who has been proven to do good and not someone who waves guns around to get his way, someone who holds people against their will, or someone who abuses the very people who would love him without reservation, given the chance.

IMO Phil Spector killed Lana, weather he meant to do it or not. He is responsible for her death, he should be found guilty and sentenced accordingly!


I am with you every step of the way. I see many of us back here again and again with the same idea, different words, and always just a little bit more passion in our statements as this trial progresses.

Not seeing what happens in courtroom 106 each day is beyond frustrating and maybe, just maybe, that is fueling some of what we are feeling. I do know that I am ready to see this trial culminate in a GUILTY verdict. If it takes another month or two to do just that..then let it be.

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

[NYGalPal]

No, I have not ignored the facts.OK?
The fact is that he has not been found guilty. The fact is that he is innocent until proven guilty. Those are the facts.OK?
Another fact is that yes I do love his music.

I do not care how you feel about it, or anyone else. Everybody has an opinion, whether you like it or not. That is another fact.:lol:

Who cares about his music which you keep harping on. How about his lack of character as a human being? An opinion is one thing, repeating "you don't care about facts and you don't care what everyone else thinks" are not opinions. Take the blinders of fame off.

:rolleyes:

[My 2 Cents]

The blog site "T&T" has posted that their blog has been nominated by "In Cold Blog" for an award under the category: BEST TRUE CRIME BLOG

It says voting will be open over the next 2 weeks. I'm posting a LINK for those of you who would like to vote, and for those of you who might enjoy checking out all the nominees. There are categories for BEST TRUE CRIME NOVELS, TV SHOWS, DOCUMENTARIES, FILM, and HALL OF FAME TRUE CRIME BOOK, etc. It might serve as a good reference point for discovering some new authors, blog sites, books, etc. :read:

http://incoldblogger.blogspot.com/2009/02/icb-detective-award-nominees-2009.html

[NYGalPal]

The song was written by Harvey Phillip Spector, Ben Spector's son. Phil Spector turned it into profit.

Nothing wrong with posting that song.

[Spectorfan8]

Who cares about his music which you keep harping on. How about his lack of character as a human being? An opinion is one thing, repeating "you don't care about facts and you don't care what everyone else thinks" are not opinions. Take the blinders of fame off.

:rolleyes:

I do care about the facts. They do not make him a murderer, otherwise, he would already be in jail. Right?
His character is fine. If you have read my posts, then you have read where I stated some facts.

If you do not like my posts, then do not respond to them.:rolleyes:
There are people that believe Mr. Spector is innocent. His close friends, other people in this country believe he is innocent. I believe he is innocent.

[NYGalPal]

I do care about the facts. They do not make him a murderer, otherwise, he would already be in jail. Right?
His character is fine. If you have read my posts, then you have read where I stated some facts.

If you do not like my posts, then do not respond to them.:rolleyes:
There are people that believe Mr. Spector is innocent. His close friends, other people in this country believe he is innocent. I believe he is innocent.You haven't said one thing that makes him innocent. Oh his "friends think it and so do I"?? Oh yeah that really convinces us. Sheesh.

Ok, see this is how I know you aren't following the facts of this case during this trial nor the last one. PS has no character. He doesn't have close friends, where ya been? Treating woman like garbage means nothing to you? Threatening woman means nothing? Shooting a woman dead means he has good character? Do you even know what good character is? Doesn't sound like it. Yikes!

Funny, you have no problem complaining wrongly about others posts. Never see you skip and scroll.

:rolleyes:

[Spectorfan8]

You haven't said one thing that makes him innocent. Oh his "friends think it and so do I"?? Oh yeah that really convinces us. Sheesh.

Ok, see this is how I know you aren't following the facts of this case during this trial nor the last one. PS has no character. He doesn't have close friends, where ya been? Treating woman like garbage means nothing to you? Threatening woman means nothing? Shooting a woman dead means he has good character? Do you even know what good character is? Doesn't sound like it. Yikes!

Funny, you have no problem complaining wrongly about others posts. Never see you skip and scroll.

:rolleyes:

FYI I watched the entire first trial. I would love to be watching this one, but no one can.
As for treating women like garbage, it seems at least one of those women kept coming back, DM.
It hasn't been proven a woman that he shot a woman dead. As for threatening women, he isn't the first man to do it.
Funny, you only chime in once in awhile. You have no idea how I view this thread. I read each and every post, before I post.
When I am here, you can see by the green light beside my name. Unlike some others, I do not hide and lurk.
Now, off with you.:lol:

[My 2 Cents]

Regardless of the information & facts that those of us on the InSession board have accumulated both inside & outside of the courtroom, in the USA the ONLY information that matters is what is presented to the jury in rm.106. But an IMPORTANT addition to that is; this jury can ONLY use the “jury instructions” given by Judge Fidler, to determine the defendant’s Guilt or Innocence. And they took an OATH to agree to do so.

IMO Juror #10 did NOT deliberate using these crucial, non-negotiable instructions. (My opinion is based on feedback & interviews by other jurors in PS1 and statements made to press by Juror 10 himself.)

I believe that if the PS2 jurors abide by those set of “jury instructions”, they will return a quick verdict of GUILTY. The evidence presented seems so strong against Spector, even without the PBA witnesses and the defense has not presented anything to either discredit this strong evidence or to put much weight in the theory that Lana “out of the blue” suddenly became suicidal. (I base this on both PS1 & PS2 – since the defense is not finished in PS2.) Their experts seem biased and unbelievable. Their other witnesses come across as unreliable, and do not seem credible. Short of the killing being recorded on tape, I don’t see how the state could have a stronger case convicting Phil of Lana’s murder.

So PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE, let’s hope these 12 jurors follow the “jury instructions” to a “T”. Because if they do, I believe all 12 will be able to agree on one verdict.

[NYGalPal]

Regardless of the information & facts that those of us on the InSession board have accumulated both inside & outside of the courtroom, in the USA the ONLY information that matters is what is presented to the jury in rm.106. But an IMPORTANT addition to that is; this jury can ONLY use the “jury instructions” given by Judge Fidler, to determine the defendant’s Guilt or Innocence. And they took an OATH to agree to do so.

IMO Juror #10 did NOT deliberate using these crucial, non-negotiable instructions. (My opinion is based on feedback & interviews by other jurors in PS1 and statements made to press by Juror 10 himself.)

I believe that if the PS2 jurors abide by those set of “jury instructions”, they will return a quick verdict of GUILTY. The evidence presented seems so strong against Spector, even without the PBA witnesses and the defense has not presented anything to either discredit this strong evidence or to put much weight in the theory that Lana “out of the blue” suddenly became suicidal. (I base this on both PS1 & PS2 – since the defense is not finished in PS2.) Their experts seem biased and unbelievable. Their other witnesses come across as unreliable, and do not seem credible. Short of the killing being recorded on tape, I don’t see how the state could have a stronger case convicting Phil of Lana’s murder.

So PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE, let’s hope these 12 jurors follow the “jury instructions” to a “T”. Because if they do, I believe all 12 will be able to agree on one verdict.

but, but his music is good he can't be a murderer! His music is good so means he has the best character too! No way can he have shot Lana even though he admitted and staged her body to cover up the evidence. <sarcasm intended>

Great post My2cents, he's as guilty!

:thumbsup:

[Spectorfan8]

My 2 Cents,

You know that I love to read your posts, especially after you have been to court. I respect what you write.

As for the jury, isn't it possible that one could feel that he didn't do it? I am not trying to make you an enemy. Because I really do enjoy your posts.

SF8

[kennedy06]

Regardless of the information & facts that those of us on the InSession board have accumulated both inside & outside of the courtroom, in the USA the ONLY information that matters is what is presented to the jury in rm.106. But an IMPORTANT addition to that is; this jury can ONLY use the “jury instructions” given by Judge Fidler, to determine the defendant’s Guilt or Innocence. And they took an OATH to agree to do so.

IMO Juror #10 did NOT deliberate using these crucial, non-negotiable instructions. (My opinion is based on feedback & interviews by other jurors in PS1 and statements made to press by Juror 10 himself.)

I believe that if the PS2 jurors abide by those set of “jury instructions”, they will return a quick verdict of GUILTY. The evidence presented seems so strong against Spector, even without the PBA witnesses and the defense has not presented anything to either discredit this strong evidence or to put much weight in the theory that Lana “out of the blue” suddenly became suicidal. (I base this on both PS1 & PS2 – since the defense is not finished in PS2.) Their experts seem biased and unbelievable. Their other witnesses come across as unreliable, and do not seem credible. Short of the killing being recorded on tape, I don’t see how the state could have a stronger case convicting Phil of Lana’s murder.

So PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE, let’s hope these 12 jurors follow the “jury instructions” to a “T”. Because if they do, I believe all 12 will be able to agree on one verdict.

You are a strong Guilty aren't you! I came to that conclusion about guilt from your other posts but this post really says it all.

I have a little different thought about 10, didn't he do missionary work on behalf of his faith in Brazil. A country that has a dominent relgion? I wonder if he had views about those with that faith. That is as far as I'll go with this.

Thank you for the link above.

[wasapi]

You are a strong Guilty aren't you! I came to that conclusion about guilt from your other posts but this post really says it all.

I have a little different thought about 10, didn't he do missionary work on behalf of his faith in Brazil. A country that has a dominent relgion? I wonder if he had views about those with that faith. That is as far as I'll go with this.

Thank you for the link above.

Kennedy, I haven't had my coffee and am a bit slow today! I got lost somewhere. You wonder if "he had views about those with that faith." I'm not sure what faith or who you are feferring to.

My son did similar missionary work in South America. The only thing I saw change when he moved back to the US was he had a firmer anti-death-pentalty stance.

[kennedy06]

Oh No! I said to much, I shouldn't have spoke up. I will pm and thanks:smile:

[penguin01]

You are correct in that Juror #10 did not follow the rules. He used something as irrelevant has his own Mother-in-Law snooping through his drawers as justification for ruling Not Guilty.
That and his "feelings" I guess. I hope a juror won't just "feel" he didn't do it in this trial. I can understand Spector fans wishing he didn't do it - but IMO he did - and the prosecution is doing a fine job of showing that to be true.
Love the new link today - some crazy PS moments in history.

[vonna]

You are correct in that Juror #10 did not follow the rules. He used something as irrelevant has his own Mother-in-Law snooping through his drawers as justification for ruling Not Guilty.

Juror #10 was the prototype for the "potted plant as juror" theory.

[My 2 Cents]

My 2 Cents,

You know that I love to read your posts, especially after you have been to court. I respect what you write.

As for the jury, isn't it possible that one could feel that he didn't do it? I am not trying to make you an enemy. Because I really do enjoy your posts.

SF8

The point of my post, was that I (me, i.e.- M2C) believe that the evidence is so strong and convincing by the state, that all 12 jurors will also see it that way. But ONLY if all 12 jurors abide by the oath they took & adhere to the "jury instructions" when deliberating. (i.e. - they don't let biases pertaining to religious beliefs, or sending man to prison, or a bias because they like his music, OR - very important - because they will vote however the foreman or another juror votes, AND they are open minded and just review & weigh the facts presented in court). Juror #2 in PS1, blatantly disregarded her oath and jury instructions by stating she would vote however another juror did.

The "strong evidence" I refer to is in regards to: PS PULLING THE TRIGGER. I do NOT know WHY PS did it - but it does NOT MATTER. My reasoning is NOT M2 vs Manslaughter. The defense did not argue a "reason" why PS may have "accidentally" pulled the trigger. So that is NOT an option to these 12 people deciding a verdict. They have to decide if they think this woman committed suicide and PS had NOTHING to do with it - OR - if PS was holding the gun when it went off. If they believe PS was holding the gun and the gun went off, the 12 jurors have no other choice but to find him guilty (not my rules, the way the law reads, as I understand it). (I also understand that technically the defense doesn't even need to present a case - but the evidence is so strong in placing him 2-3 away from LC when gun went off, confessing "I think I killed somebody", witnessed holding murder weapon & destroying evidence at crime scene - - that he would be a fool not to.)

If you or others believe MANSLAUGHTER is what happened, then that is another matter and another topic for conversation. And I would be very open to hearing what the defense wants to say took place, and I would be open to changing my position - but as I understand it, that is NOT up for discussion in that juror room. Juror instructions state they can NOT "speculate" on facts not in evidence.

After answering your question, I have one for you, if you don't mind:
Do you NOT believe ADS "SAW" PS holding the gun in his hand right after Lana was killed? And if NOT, why? (ONLY if you are comfortable answering - I am NOT trying to put you on the spot - I'm just curious what NG posters think about that 1 single point. I am NOT asking about guilt or innocence) AND NO SF8 - I did not take any offense or attack to your question. Not at all. :biggrin:

[wasapi]

If this has been asked and answered I apologize.

After the first trial did the two alternate jurors ever say how they would have voted?

[My 2 Cents]

You are a strong Guilty aren't you! I came to that conclusion about guilt from your other posts but this post really says it all.

I have a little different thought about 10, didn't he do missionary work on behalf of his faith in Brazil. A country that has a dominent relgion? I wonder if he had views about those with that faith. That is as far as I'll go with this.

Thank you for the link above.

After listening to all the evidence presented during 1 1/2 trials for this case, I do feel strongly that PS is guilty of pulling the trigger of the gun that killed Lana. I do NOT think LANA committed suicide or that she was playing with the gun and it "accidentally" went off - - not with the gun going off in her mouth.

I especially feel certain because of the additional information that I have learned that was not presented to the jury. For example: All the times he has almost shot other people by brandishing his gun (and not just woman). All the statements PS made both at the house and at the precinct and then in taped interviews and to Esquire Magazine, and on and on and on (an innocent person has the 1 TRUE story of what happened, they do NOT tell 5-6 completely different stories of what took place about something this important. If so, why would they???). I felt ADS was a very credible witness and there was no reason not to believe what he said he saw & heard as being true & accurate. Also, the fact that PS never called 911 after someone was shot in the mouth in front of him - to me I can find no other explanation, other than him wanting to bide time while he figured out what to do. OF COURSE, the jury can't use ALL this information to decide a verdict - - but I certainly can.

So, YES . . .K6 - I do feel Phil Spector is definitely GUILTY of holding the gun and pulling the trigger that killed Lana. And based on the way I understand the laws to be written, that would mean to me that he is guilty of M2. I understand that others on this board think differently and I respect that. This is just "my opinion" and these are many (not all) the reasons why I feel this way.

RE: Juror 10 - If his faith or beliefs (or any other biases) made it difficult for him to convict a person of M2 (if he found the evidence supported that), then he had a responsibility to tell the judge this during jury selection. And I apologize if I am misunderstanding what you meant.

[My 2 Cents]

If this has been asked and answered I apologize.

After the first trial did the two alternate jurors ever say how they would have voted?

IIRC, all the alternate jurors stated that would have voted GUILTY. I believe I read that they were upset and embarrassed with the outcome of the trial (that's what I recall reading - some of the feedback may have come from other jurors, based on what these people said to them - I'm not sure if all of the jurors and alternates spoke directly to the press.)

[vonna]

IIRC, all the alternate jurors stated that would have voted GUILTY. I believe I read that they were upset and embarrassed with the outcome of the trial (that's what I recall reading - some of the feedback may have come from other jurors, based on what these people said to them - I'm not sure if all of the jurors and alternates spoke directly to the press.)

Your recollection of the events is the same as mine.

[My 2 Cents]

Oh No! I said to much, I shouldn't have spoke up. I will pm and thanks:smile:

K6 - - please do NOT ever feel this way. You are one of the most considerate and respectful posters on this forum. And YOU provide some of the most interesting LINKs as well as insights. I can't believe anyone would read your posts as someone being disrespectful or in any other context, other than "food for thought". That is exactly what this forum is for - throwing out some ideas and different points of view . . . and see what "sticks" or what helps others, in uncovering "the truth" about what took place on 2/3/03 at 1700 Grandview Drive.

I, on the other hand - tend to be too opinionated and long winded - - and I apologize to the forum & all the posters for that. . . . Sorry. Sometimes I just can't help myself.

[Spectorfan8]

The point of my post, was that I (me, i.e.- M2C) believe that the evidence is so strong and convincing by the state, that all 12 jurors will also see it that way. But ONLY if all 12 jurors abide by the oath they took & adhere to the "jury instructions" when deliberating. (i.e. - they don't let biases pertaining to religious beliefs, or sending man to prison, or a bias because they like his music, OR - very important - because they will vote however the foreman or another juror votes, AND they are open minded and just review & weigh the facts presented in court). Juror #2 in PS1, blatantly disregarded her oath and jury instructions by stating she would vote however another juror did.

The "strong evidence" I refer to is in regards to: PS PULLING THE TRIGGER. I do NOT know WHY PS did it - but it does NOT MATTER. My reasoning is NOT M2 vs Manslaughter. The defense did not argue a "reason" why PS may have "accidentally" pulled the trigger. So that is NOT an option to these 12 people deciding a verdict. They have to decide if they think this woman committed suicide and PS had NOTHING to do with it - OR - if PS was holding the gun when it went off. If they believe PS was holding the gun and the gun went off, the 12 jurors have no other choice but to find him guilty (not my rules, the way the law reads, as I understand it). (I also understand that technically the defense doesn't even need to present a case - but the evidence is so strong in placing him 2-3 away from LC when gun went off, confessing "I think I killed somebody", witnessed holding murder weapon & destroying evidence at crime scene - - that he would be a fool not to.)

If you or others believe MANSLAUGHTER is what happened, then that is another matter and another topic for conversation. And I would be very open to hearing what the defense wants to say took place, and I would be open to changing my position - but as I understand it, that is NOT up for discussion in that juror room. Juror instructions state they can NOT "speculate" on facts not in evidence.

After answering your question, I have one for you, if you don't mind:
Do you NOT believe ADS "SAW" PS holding the gun in his hand right after Lana was killed? And if NOT, why? (ONLY if you are comfortable answering - I am NOT trying to put you on the spot - I'm just curious what NG posters think about that 1 single point. I am NOT asking about guilt or innocence) AND NO SF8 - I did not take any offense or attack to your question. Not at all. :biggrin:

I do believe that ADS saw what he says he saw. I do not base my belief on that. I believe it was an accident.
I have no problem answering your question. You post the most info on what is going on in the courtroom....other than T&T.
You are also a very kind poster....even though you are a G.:smile:

SF8

[My 2 Cents]

Correction, it was Juror #1 that "copied" the Foreman's vote. She admitted to voting Guilty until learning how the Foreman voted, then changed her vote. This is a blatant disregard to the rules they swore to follow.

I was disappointed to not hear about the Court doing something about it. If she had just kept her mouth shut, no one would have known and her vote would have been fine.

Thanks G - - - I trusted my memory regarding what juror # it was.
. . . I'm off now to go take my "Ginkgo" (biloba). ha, ha, ha. :wink:

[My 2 Cents]

I do believe that ADS saw what he says he saw. I do not base my belief on that. I believe it was an accident.
I have no problem answering your question. You post the most info on what is going on in the courtroom....other than T&T.
You are also a very kind poster....even though you are a G.:smile:

SF8

Interesting . . .
Thanks for the response SF8.

[Spectorfan8]

Interesting . . .
Thanks for the response SF8.

No problem....I like "interesting".

[dref99]

Correction, it was Juror #1 that "copied" the Foreman's vote. She admitted to voting Guilty until learning how the Foreman voted, then changed her vote. This is a blatant disregard to the rules they swore to follow.

I was disappointed to not hear about the Court doing something about it. If she had just kept her mouth shut, no one would have known and her vote would have been fine.

I didn't think she spoke at all GP? My memory says that Juror #9 discussed the voting and said that at one stage it was 11-1 and he identifed who voted NG. I could, of course be wrong - but only 3 jurors spoke immediately after the trial - Did more speak later?

jmo

[My 2 Cents]

SNIPPED...

SPOILER ALERT - PLEASE DON'T READ THIS IF YOU DON'T WANT TO KNOW an IMPORTANT LAST LINE OF THE PLAY/BOOK or a DISCLOSURE made by a main character in the play/book:

end SNIP.....

i so appreciate you posting the warning. i want to read the book and see the movie.

Sorry, if O/T:
I recommend it. I haven't seen the movie or play (only book). I want to see movie before it's gone (if it's not too late). I hear Amy Adams is excellent (and of course, Meryl Streep & Philip Seymour Hoffman are always so good - IMO.)

[tartangirl]

How pathetically wrong and petty your remark was. Does not deserve to be quoted here or anywhere...ever :glare:



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