Phil Spector [6/24 please seen last post by Admin)

[Mort_Snerd]

Since Phil Spector was convicted in his second trial and has not yet been evaluated and sent to a California State prison, I have a few questions for the people who have legal experience.

1. Can Phil Spector have more than one appeal in process through the appeals court?

2. Does the fact that there is a Civil case against him mean that his 5th Admendment rights can be used while the civil case is open to give him the right not to answer questions during the case because he has appeal(s) in process?

Mortie

[Nic99]

Mortie,

One appeal only, through the appeals court. That being said, I see no grounds for a sucessful appeal. Judge Strickland would have had to make a serious error for him to be sucessful. His next step would be the Supreme Court which takes years and frankly, I don't think he will live that long.

No, he cannot invoke his Fifth Amendment Right to Self Incrimination in the Civil Trial unless the question has to do with possibility of him incriminating himself in a different criminal action than the one he has been convicted of. There is no down side if he refuses to answer. He will be held in contempt of court which makes no difference since he serving 19 to life. What is another 30 days for contempt of court mean to him now.

Why would Judge Strickland have had to made an error, what case was he on?? I thought it was Judge Fidler and he certainly made a number of errors which can and will be brought to appeal soon.

[dref99]

Mortie,

One appeal only, through the appeals court. That being said, I see no grounds for a sucessful appeal. Judge Strickland would have had to make a serious error for him to be sucessful. His next step would be the Supreme Court which takes years and frankly, I don't think he will live that long.

No, he cannot invoke his Fifth Amendment Right to Self Incrimination in the Civil Trial unless the question has to do with possibility of him incriminating himself in a different criminal action than the one he has been convicted of. There is no down side if he refuses to answer. He will be held in contempt of court which makes no difference since he serving 19 to life. What is another 30 days for contempt of court mean to him now.

Phil will certainly be advised by his lawyers not to answer questions in the civil trial viz

Mr. Spector intends to invoke his privileges not to testify against himself until all issues regarding the criminal action has been resolved. He cannot engage in discovery in this present action without being compelled to waive his privileges against self-incrimination under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution.

from a submission (rejected) to delay discovery for the civil trial.

DW submitted
Due to the gravity of the charges pending gainst Mr. Spector, he will not be permitted to testify at deposition or respond to any form of written discovery which related to the February 3, 2003 incident. This is due to the potential impact it could have on Mr. Spector's pending crimnal case.

Full details http://sprocket-trials.blogspot.com/2009/06/phil-spector-civil-case-motions.html

And I believe it will be very hard to find any errors made by JF for an appeal. The only comment I heard/read about related to allowing the testimony of the prior events against women.

jmo

[Nic99]

Phil will certainly be advised by his lawyers not to answer questions in the civil trial viz

Mr. Spector intends to invoke his privileges not to testify against himself until all issues regarding the criminal action has been resolved. He cannot engage in discovery in this present action without being compelled to waive his privileges against self-incrimination under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution.

from a submission (rejected) to delay discovery for the civil trial.

DW submitted
Due to the gravity of the charges pending gainst Mr. Spector, he will not be permitted to testify at deposition or respond to any form of written discovery which related to the February 3, 2003 incident. This is due to the potential impact it could have on Mr. Spector's pending crimnal case.

Full details http://sprocket-trials.blogspot.com/2009/06/phil-spector-civil-case-motions.html

And I believe it will be very hard to find any errors made by JF for an appeal. The only comment I heard/read about related to allowing the testimony of the prior events against women.

jmo

Exactly and that last point is certainly enough to be getting on with imo; amongst other items, including hearsay, prejudicial accounts in opening testimony, etc, etc, etc......

[Nic99]

My apologies. I did mean Judge Fidler. That being said, I think that he made every effort not to make Judicial error.

Accepted, but I do think he left areas to be appealed in this case. The PBAs being allowed; the very prejudicial opening testimony of AJ; the hearsay of VT, these are all areas which can be contested for appeal and should never have been allowed in this trial imo.

[Details]

My apologies. I did mean Judge Fidler. That being said, I think that he made every effort not to make Judicial error.Even the defense attorney praised him as a good judge - while they disagreed with the verdict. He made no errors - gave the defense every leeway practical, sometimes almost too much.

Appeals very rarely succeed even to the point of getting a new trial, even with bad judges, and real issues, let alone with this made up issue that women having a gun pointed at them as they turn Phil down are not similar enough to be an admissible pattern of behavior.

[Nic99]

To adequately answer your comment, I need to search case law on PBA's being allowed in a retrial. VT's name escapes me at the moment. VT?

I was referring to Vincent Tannazo. I have researched the law regarding the PBAs and VT's hearsay and believe there is a very good case for an appeal for PS at appeal.

[dref99]

To adequately answer your comment, I need to search case law on PBA's being allowed in a retrial. VT's name escapes me at the moment. VT?

PBAs were fought against by all the defence attorneys for both trials - unsuccessfully. I don't believe this will be a winner for an appeal - but mentioned it because it is the ONLY thing that DW suggested when he stated they would appeal (He said "lots of issues" but only mentioned one)

VT is Vincent Tannazzo - retired security guard for Joan Rivers - first witness for the prosecution.


jmo

[Pinwheel]

sorry if this question is a bit off topic or really dim-witted but i tried to follow this case but kept getting pulled away from it with other things. i heard that other women testified that they were threatened and stuff by him in the same way as the victim (without being killed of course) and some of those women say it happened many years ago. was that stuff considered hearsay because he wasn't charged with assault back then when it happened? i ask because i wonder if that could be an appealable thing.

[Nic99]

The PBAs are not similar in any way with the Lana case and many of the ladies involved actually went back and visited PS again, so they couldn't have been that afraid of him or else why go back. The prosecution were clutching at straws and these will be their down fall in appeal. Crikey one of the PBA witnesses had unfortunately passed away and her testimony could not be questionned; so there is a point in itself at the second trial. Major mistake made there imo. Could cost them heavily in the appeal:rolleyes:

[Details]

sorry if this question is a bit off topic or really dim-witted but i tried to follow this case but kept getting pulled away from it with other things. i heard that other women testified that they were threatened and stuff by him in the same way as the victim (without being killed of course) and some of those women say it happened many years ago. was that stuff considered hearsay because he wasn't charged with assault back then when it happened? i ask because i wonder if that could be an appealable thing.It's not hearsay - they testified to what happened to them - no need for any charges to be filed for it to be valid. However, at least one of them did call the police - the police just dismissed the whole thing. The PBAs were IDENTICAL to Lana - and the fact that some of them continued contact with Spector does not diminish them in any way.

[Nic99]

It's not hearsay - they testified to what happened to them - no need for any charges to be filed for it to be valid. However, at least one of them did call the police - the police just dismissed the whole thing. The PBAs were IDENTICAL to Lana - and the fact that some of them continued contact with Spector does not diminish them in any way.

Yup exactly, the police dismissed the whole thing, they obviously had good reason too; doesn't mean that is then valid as a previous PBA, else why dismiss it. This whole case is hugely flawed and I hope that the truth comes out in the appeal; as much as some seem to want to slaughter PS on this board and his supporters, he should be given a fair appeal and justice should prevail; he is no scapegoat and should not be allowed to be.

[Details]

In the initial trial, Tannazzo testified that he thought the events took place sometime between 1994 and 1997. Today, he changed his testimony slightly, stating that the events could have occurred in the "early 90's" from 1991 on. In cross, Weinberg kept asking him "why" he changed his testimony, and hammered home the fact that Tannazzo did not have any corroborating evidence to back up his claim that the events took place. He admitted he did not speak to Joan Rivers or Dorothy Melvin about the incidents afterwards, nor did he try to report it to the police when he discovered Spector was carrying a concealed weapon at one event or note them in a diary. Weinberg tried to paint Tannazzo as someone who purposefully interjected himself in the first trial for the publicity.

http://sprocket-trials.blogspot.com/...testimony.html (http://sprocket-trials.blogspot.com/2008/11/phil-spector-trial-day-one-of-testimony.html)

Cridible witness? What do you think? I doubt that he will ever be called if there is an appeal.Credible by me. He matches every other bit of testimony about Spector. The guy had problems with women telling him No, and liked his guns. Nor is it any shock he didn't speak to the hosts about this behavior - these are powerful people, you try stepping up and speaking out, and you will get squashed, lose your job, and be blacklisted by all the other powerful people. Same reason as some of the other women threatened by Spector were still willing to be around him, same reason why the cops took Spector's side when called out. This was a very different time, and a very different culture than what most of us live in today.

[Pinwheel]

It's not hearsay - they testified to what happened to them - no need for any charges to be filed for it to be valid. However, at least one of them did call the police - the police just dismissed the whole thing. The PBAs were IDENTICAL to Lana - and the fact that some of them continued contact with Spector does not diminish them in any way.

thank you that clears that up. i remember reading that the same scenario was happening to so many women over like 30 years in his home and then i watched that ramones documentary and they said he did it to them too. he wouldn't let them leave! he ain't lonely now!

[Jay]

Since Phil Spector was convicted in his second trial and has not yet been evaluated and sent to a California State prison, I have a few questions for the people who have legal experience.

1. Can Phil Spector have more than one appeal in process through the appeals court?

Sure. Next step is to the intermediate court of appeals for CA. Next step is to the CA SC.

A 2254 Motion can be filed in a federal district court after state remedies are exhausted, ONLY if a FEDERAL question is presented, as we see in 2254:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/search/display.html?terms=2254&url=/uscode/html/uscode28/usc_sec_28_00002254----000-.html

OR an appeal directly to the US SC from the CA SC.

If you mean more than one appeal at the SAME time, no.


2. Does the fact that there is a Civil case against him mean that his 5th Admendment rights can be used while the civil case is open to give him the right not to answer questions during the case because he has appeal(s) in process?

Mortie


We have 2 distinct documents here, the US Constitution AND the CA Constitution.

You will find, the US Constitution incrimination clause does not compel a person, who faces a civil lawsuit, to make any statement that would tend to incriminate them, IF a criminal appeal is pending.

I am assuming the CA Constitution is in line, even if not, the 5th AM is controlling.

[Mort_Snerd]

How long does a California "Evaluation" period normally last in a felony murder case.

Mortie

[Ellie]

Ahem. Very good question, Mort. I'd also like to be kept abreast of PS's chances of appeal as well as how he fares in prison, and of course information on the civil trial.

[RootBeer]

My question is, when will we know Phil's prison address. I would like to send him a card. :wub:

[dref99]

I sure never thought to look on this particular board, but at last there is a reply button. The Prison web site suggests 60 to 90 days to process incoming inmates

http://www.cdcr.ca.gov/Visitors/Facilities/NKSP.html

[Nic99]

Small price to pay for Phil's inevitable freedom that will follow. Its good to know he's settled in and has made a great impression; always knew he would (head honcho an' all).

[Jay]

More specifically:


http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/rules/index.cfm?title=eight&linkid=rule8_308

[Anakerie]

Small price to pay for Phil's inevitable freedom that will follow. Its good to know he's settled in and has made a great impression; always knew he would (head honcho an' all).

"Head honcho"? ROFL!! Do you really think that Phil could dominate a prison and become "head honcho"? Oh my goodness.. If the information is coming from Rachelle, please pass a ton or so of salt.. :rolleyes:

[RootBeer]

I read on Sprocket a fan asking for the same info even though it is posted here and a few other sites. What about when he was in a jail in LA? Could have sent a card there if you really wanted to send him well wishes.

I sent Phil a card right after the verdict but mailed it to his penthouse address in hopes that Rachelle will pass it along. I just was not sure what his final destination in the prison system and did not want to send a card to the wrong place.

I will keep you all updated on any response I get from my friend Phil.

:wub:

[True2Blues]

"Head honcho"? ROFL!! Do you really think that Phil could dominate a prison and become "head honcho"? Oh my goodness.. If the information is coming from Rachelle, please pass a ton or so of salt.. :rolleyes:


No kidding. Who ever said he'd "Made a Great Impression"? Those people see two bit murderers every single day. I don't recall reading that any of them found PS to be anything special.

[RootBeer]

No kidding. Who ever said he'd "Made a Great Impression"? Those people see two bit murderers every single day. I don't recall reading that any of them found PS to be anything special.

But that is what you don't get, Phil Spector is "special", always has been, always will be. jmo

[Details]

Spector's hair is sure 'special' - the rest of him - not so much. Just another person with violent tendencies that went too far. Prison is where we collect those 'special' people.

[Anakerie]

But that is what you don't get, Phil Spector is "special", always has been, always will be. jmo
Once upon a time, Phil might have been considered "special" by people because of his talent.. Not all people though.. Just some of them. Now though he's pretty much a "has-been". Hasn't done anything musically in years besides collect royalties for his and other people's music.

As far as I can see, the only thing "special" about him now is the fact that he played with a gun one too many times and he finally killed someone. He'll be treated now to being hosted by the State of California along with all the other murderers, druggies, thieves and other criminals. Oh yeah, that's "special" all right... :rolleyes:

Now, can we get back to the topic at hand, RootBeer? I'm curious about your idea of what the grounds for appeal will be? And when do you think it'll be filed?

[True2Blues]

But that is what you don't get, Phil Spector is "special", always has been, always will be. jmo


He's in that special class known as cold blooded murderers, yes. Other than that, he isn't special in any way, to me and many, many, others.

[dref99]

He's in that special class known as cold blooded murderers, yes. Other than that, he isn't special in any way, to me and many, many, others.

So many people (including myself) said during trial 1 that they had never heard of Phil until the death of Lana - so it seems he is more infamous than famous. Computers have long taken over many of the skills of music production - but not the art of the singer. Listening to a soloist who can sing without ANY backing is my idea of great vocalist.

jmo

[RootBeer]

So many people (including myself) said during trial 1 that they had never heard of Phil until the death of Lana - so it seems he is more infamous than famous. Computers have long taken over many of the skills of music production - but not the art of the singer. Listening to a soloist who can sing without ANY backing is my idea of great vocalist.

jmo

I never heard of Lana until she died.

[RootBeer]

Once upon a time, Phil might have been considered "special" by people because of his talent.. Not all people though.. Just some of them. Now though he's pretty much a "has-been". Hasn't done anything musically in years besides collect royalties for his and other people's music.

As far as I can see, the only thing "special" about him now is the fact that he played with a gun one too many times and he finally killed someone. He'll be treated now to being hosted by the State of California along with all the other murderers, druggies, thieves and other criminals. Oh yeah, that's "special" all right... :rolleyes:

Now, can we get back to the topic at hand, RootBeer? I'm curious about your idea of what the grounds for appeal will be? And when do you think it'll be filed?

Grounds for Appeal: one of them being the PBA witness who could not be cross examined, and baciscally the PBAs themself.

Appeal to be filed: not sure, but would think before the end of the year.

[Nic99]

So many people (including myself) said during trial 1 that they had never heard of Phil until the death of Lana - so it seems he is more infamous than famous. Computers have long taken over many of the skills of music production - but not the art of the singer. Listening to a soloist who can sing without ANY backing is my idea of great vocalist.

jmo

Exactly, computers have now taken over the skills of music production, HOWEVER, when Phil was producing he used REAL musicians to create that unique and famous 'wall of sound' quality, that was achieved by using many musicians for the 'wall' in the background, and not computers. Hence, he produced superb real music that is played and played even today.

Some people may not have known the name of Phil Spector, BUT, you name me one person that does not know of at least one of the songs he produced. He is pure musical genius. A very rare thing these days unfortunately.

Nic

[vonna]

Exactly, computers have now taken over the skills of music production, HOWEVER, when Phil was producing he used REAL musicians to create that unique and famous 'wall of sound' quality, that was achieved by using many musicians for the 'wall' in the background, and not computers. Hence, he produced superb real music that is played and played even today.

Some people may not have known the name of Phil Spector, BUT, you name me one person that does not know of at least one of the songs he produced. He is pure musical genius. A very rare thing these days unfortunately.

Nic

While we may have been familiar with the music we were totally unfamiliar with the name. Being a musical genius does not give one a free pass to commit murder.

[tartangirl]

All the wonderful pieces of music
in the world will not make up for the last deed executed on February 03, 2003. That action is the one that will stay in the minds of many for long. :scared:


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

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

[Deannalynn]

How long does a California "Evaluation" period normally last in a felony murder case.

Mortie

I am with the understanding it could take up to 3 months.
JMO

[Deannalynn]

Grounds for Appeal: one of them being the PBA witness who could not be cross examined, and baciscally the PBAs themself.

Appeal to be filed: not sure, but would think before the end of the year.

Judge Fidler was very specific it that ruling if you remember. There are no grounds for these PBA witnesses for an appeal.
This has been hashed over since day one.
Any more grounds?:sneaky:
JMO

[Anakerie]

Judge Fidler was very specific it that ruling if you remember. There are no grounds for these PBA witnesses for an appeal.
This has been hashed over since day one.
Any more grounds?:sneaky:
JMO
I seem to remember Judge Fidler citing precedents for his ruling on the PBA's when the arguments were going on... Or am I remembering a different case? I do know that Judge Fidler was very precise and very careful with all of his rulings. I don't think any of his rulings were done in the "heat of the moment"... I do know that he has a very good reputation in the area of appeals.. In other words, his rulings usually stand intact.

[vonna]

Judge Fidler was very specific it that ruling if you remember. There are no grounds for these PBA witnesses for an appeal.
This has been hashed over since day one.
Any more grounds?:sneaky:
JMO

It certainly has! It's as if there are those who think that if they say it often enough it will have validity.

[♫Rock*Star♫]

snipped

He is pure musical genius.

Nic

Was.

Phil Spector is now merely a convicted murderer.

A not so very rare thing these days. Unfortunately.

[Deannalynn]

I never heard of Lana until she died.

Point taken. Lana Clarkson was an honest, beautiful person who got up every day and went to work, paid her bills and was kind to everyone who came across her path. She paid her bills, her taxes and had a family who loved her so dearly. She was full of life and a good friend and daughter to those who loved her dearly. Then a fatal night occurred when she came across a man who decided she was going to do as he said or she would die.
It continues to sadden many people because she didn't deserve to die at the hand of a man who didn't know her, didn't know her family and the wonderful things she contributed to society.:sad:
This murder is far from being over and it has nothing to do with an appeal that will be sought. There are many years upcoming for Lana to have what is do to her. A family and friends who will continue the fight until ALL justice is prevailed.
Yes, I'm thinking about the Civil suit.
She will be able to finally rest when all is said and done.
:rose:
JMO

[Details]

I never heard of Lana until she died - but I knew her work - Amazon Women on the Moon is a favorite of mine. She did a good job in her role there - played it exactly as it was supposed to be done. But then, I never heard of Spector either. Most people don't know anyone but the biggest names - and neither Lana nor Spector were in that group.

[Details]

Exactly, computers have now taken over the skills of music production, HOWEVER, when Phil was producing he used REAL musicians to create that unique and famous 'wall of sound' quality, that was achieved by using many musicians for the 'wall' in the background, and not computers. Hence, he produced superb real music that is played and played even today.

Some people may not have known the name of Phil Spector, BUT, you name me one person that does not know of at least one of the songs he produced. He is pure musical genius. A very rare thing these days unfortunately.

NicI don't buy it. I've heard of those songs - and the musician, the writer, the band, the singer - those may be musical geniuses. The producer? No. Some random technique in the background - nope - that's not why I like those songs. The words, emotion, harmonies, etc. - that's why people love those songs. Wall of Sound - might be something that adds to the sound - but no musical genius idea.

He had one idea, used it to gain power and prestige, used the power to let him exercise his violent controlling side, and went too far as he lost that power and prestige.

They remade the song with his stuff stripped out - I think that says a lot about what an 'incredible' technique it was.

Doesn't matter though - were he Mozart himself, and famous worldwide, murdering someone is still not OK.

[Nic99]

I don't buy it. I've heard of those songs - and the musician, the writer, the band, the singer - those may be musical geniuses. The producer? No. Some random technique in the background - nope - that's not why I like those songs. The words, emotion, harmonies, etc. - that's why people love those songs. Wall of Sound - might be something that adds to the sound - but no musical genius idea.

He had one idea, used it to gain power and prestige, used the power to let him exercise his violent controlling side, and went too far as he lost that power and prestige.

They remade the song with his stuff stripped out - I think that says a lot about what an 'incredible' technique it was.

Doesn't matter though - were he Mozart himself, and famous worldwide, murdering someone is still not OK.

You may not buy it but millions of people have bought his records. Paul McCartney stripped down one albumn, Let It Be, and this has not been anywhere as near as successful as the original, so that says a lot imo.

When I buy a record it is for the sound and the voice, and he sure did produce a unique and celebrated sound by millions of people. Of course the music production matters hugely to the final sound of any record, just as a brilliant film producer/director matters to the success of a movie.

He is wrongly convicted imo and is not a murderer, so let justice prevail in a successful appeal for Phil Spector, music genius, in millions of peoples' eyes, even if not in yours.

[True2Blues]

I never heard of Lana until she died.

What difference does that make? I've never heard of most murder victims before their death, but they were all entitled to life.

[Nic99]

Judge Fidler was very specific it that ruling if you remember. There are no grounds for these PBA witnesses for an appeal.
This has been hashed over since day one.
Any more grounds?:sneaky:
JMO

Exactly, Judge Fidler, allowed a PBA from a witness that was not able to be cross-examined in the 2nd trial. That was a big mistake imo and is just one reason for appeal, including the other PBAs which should never have been allowed. The opening of AJ was highly prejudicial against PS and , as such, this is not allowed in CA courts and hearsay testimony of VT, etc, etc, etc.....

Believe me, Judge Fidler, made many mistakes in this trial and also the first one, by confusing the jury in certain procedures, which lead to a hung jury and HIS mistakes will be the reason for a successful appeal in this 2nd trial which is so flawed it makes a mockery of the CA court system.

[vonna]

Exactly, Judge Fidler, allowed a PBA from a witness that was not able to be cross-examined in the 2nd trial. That was a big mistake imo and is just one reason for appeal, including the other PBAs which should never have been allowed. The opening of AJ was highly prejudicial against PS and , as such, this is not allowed in CA courts and hearsay testimony of VT, etc, etc, etc.....

Believe me, Judge Fidler, made many mistakes in this trial and also the first one, by confusing the jury in certain procedures, which lead to a hung jury and HIS mistakes will be the reason for a successful appeal in this 2nd trial which is so flawed it makes a mockery of the CA court system.

These arguments do not become any more convincing through repetition.

[Nic99]

These arguments do not become any more convincing through repetition.

Who's arguing, certainly not me. I am giving my reasons for a successful appeal; it would be good to have a reasonable debate on it. Isn't that what these boards are about, reasonable debate:confused:

[penguin01]

Exactly, Judge Fidler, allowed a PBA from a witness that was not able to be cross-examined in the 2nd trial. That was a big mistake imo and is just one reason for appeal, including the other PBAs which should never have been allowed. The opening of AJ was highly prejudicial against PS and , as such, this is not allowed in CA courts and hearsay testimony of VT, etc, etc, etc.....

Believe me, Judge Fidler, made many mistakes in this trial and also the first one, by confusing the jury in certain procedures, which lead to a hung jury and HIS mistakes will be the reason for a successful appeal in this 2nd trial which is so flawed it makes a mockery of the CA court system. Believe you? Ummmm - can we get some background on you? I never heard of you before. Believe you - or believe Fidler?...... decisions, decisions.:shrug:

[penguin01]

It's a fact Judge Fidler was back-pedalling in the first trial, unfortunately for him, it was unsuccessful. Hung jury....... He made mistakes; he confused the jury in the processes at the final hour. Judge Fidler, well, he will be held accountable for his mistakes in the second trial and Phil Spector will be set free:thumbsup: I simply asked for background on nic99....from nic99. I have sufficient info on Judge Fidler. Do you have a problem with reading comprehension? That might explain some things.

[vonna]

No, I don't have a problem reading comprehension! Do you? Why are you asking for background on a poster, surely that is personal. They are giving their opinion as you are. I have never heard of such a thing on these boards as posters asking for background on other posters, what is your point?

One has a perfect right to ask for credentials when one is stating opinions as facts.

[Anakerie]

Maybe you do recall Judge Fidler citing precedents for his ruling in PBAs, but unfortunately for you, Judge Fidler does make mistakes; sorry to disappoint you there. Crikey, it was him that made the jury confused in the first trial and look what happened there. He tried back-pedaling but it was too late; hung jury, fact.

Judge Fidler has made many mistakes in the second trial and these will be heard and accounted for in the forthcoming appeal. He is certainly NOT all that you think he is.
The jury instructions that "confused" the 1st jury came from PHIL's "appeal" lawyer... :rolleyes:

[Ellie]

Great post Nic:thumbsup: Lana who????

Wow. Just... Wow. (shaking my head.) What a nice post.

They probably weren't that concerned about speaking with the deceased PBA because they had so many others to back up what she said.

[Anakerie]

It was Judge Fidler who confused the jury and tried to back down on that; his mistake and just one of many he made. He should never have allowed AJ's opening argument, it was way too prejudicial and as for Adrianno DeSouza; welll he was worried about being deported and couldn't be believed in his testimony, whether his spoken English was good or not, he was only concerned about himself.

Onwards to the successful appeal
Good luck with that.. It'll be a while..

Not even going to "debate" your other lines... The trial is OVER. Phil was convicted and he is serving his time now. See ya.

[Nic99]

I simply asked for background on nic99....from nic99. I have sufficient info on Judge Fidler. Do you have a problem with reading comprehension? That might explain some things.

What background do you want to know about me. I have followed this trial on these boards for a while now and posted since Oct 08. I have researched extensively the facts of this trial and imo Phil Spector is innocent, what else do you need to know?

Nic

[vonna]

What background do you want to know about me. I have followed this trial on these boards for a while now and posted since Oct 08. I have researched extensively the facts of this trial and imo Phil Spector is innocent, what else do you need to know?

Nic

You can only come to that conclusion by ignoring all the facts on the case that persuaded the majority of this board - twenty two jurors - and most of the alternates. You insist on maintaining your position with only ridiculous speculation and the very lame - suicide absurdity. And you seek to reinforce your position by monotonous repetition and keep insisting that we debate when there's nothing to debate.

[Nic99]

You can only come to that conclusion by ignoring all the facts on the case that persuaded the majority of this board - twenty two jurors - and most of the alternates. You insist on maintaining your position with only ridiculous speculation and the very lame - suicide absurdity. And you seek to reinforce your position by monotonous repetition and keep insisting that we debate when there's nothing to debate.

I came to that conclusion by reading and understanding all the facts in this trial, on the case that resulted in a hung jury on the first trial and in the second trial was so prejudiced and media run it was ridiculous imo. I am allowed to insist on my opinion, and posters have asked for reasons for appeal and they have been given. Why ask, if you choose not to debate? If you do not wish to debate, why do you continue on here then, if no wish to debate the facts:confused:

Nic

[Deannalynn]

You can only come to that conclusion by ignoring all the facts on the case that persuaded the majority of this board - twenty two jurors - and most of the alternates. You insist on maintaining your position with only ridiculous speculation and the very lame - suicide absurdity. And you seek to reinforce your position by monotonous repetition and keep insisting that we debate when there's nothing to debate.

I was trying to think of how to say this as diplomatic as you have, Ms Vonna.
I could not have said it any better.

It seems that's all I read is peat, peat and repeat when it comes to how grand Spector is. He is now just as grand as the next guy in prison. No better and no worse than the general population. I am wondering if he has put out his marks yet for a Spector's little helper yet. A man has to survive when they are incarcerated. (This is said several times when I watch that program they have called "lock up")

I myself have never watched a civil suit on trial via television and I doubt his appeal will get that far. In the event it does it should be a very short trial compared to the PS1 and PS2, eh?

[Nic99]

I was trying to think of how to say this as diplomatic as you have, Ms Vonna.
I could not have said it any better.

It seems that's all I read is peat, peat and repeat when it comes to how grand Spector is. He is now just as grand as the next guy in prison. No better and no worse than the general population. I am wondering if he has put out his marks yet for a Spector's little helper yet. A man has to survive when they are incarcerated. (This is said several times when I watch that program they have called "lock up")

I myself have never watched a civil suit on trial via television and I doubt his appeal will get that far. In the event it does it should be a very short trial compared to the PS1 and PS2, eh?

Diplomatic rofl! You have read nothing yet; a man has to survive, well he sure has, he is the head honcho, or haven't you read that yet. They love him and they respect him. I agree with you on one fact, his appeal will be short, because it is obvious the faults Judge Fidler made won't take long to process and result in the successful appeal of Phil Spector:thumbsup:

[vonna]

Diplomatic rofl! You have read nothing yet; a man has to survive, well he sure has, he is the head honcho, or haven't you read that yet. They love him and they respect him. I agree with you on one fact, his appeal will be short, because it is obvious the faults Judge Fidler made won't take long to process and result in the successful appeal of Phil Spector:thumbsup:

There you go again.

[Deannalynn]

Convincing yourself? Wrong person to convince if your speaking of an appeal process.
Ya see, it involves a Judge. Based on what I have read from your posts, a Judge you are not.
I am here to discuss issues.
You are making this board quite uncomfortable and you are trying to create a hostile environment.
Please behave yourself, person. JMO

[dref99]

Exactly, Judge Fidler, allowed a PBA from a witness that was not able to be cross-examined in the 2nd trial. That was a big mistake imo and is just one reason for appeal, including the other PBAs which should never have been allowed. The opening of AJ was highly prejudicial against PS and , as such, this is not allowed in CA courts and hearsay testimony of VT, etc, etc, etc.....

Believe me, Judge Fidler, made many mistakes in this trial and also the first one, by confusing the jury in certain procedures, which lead to a hung jury and HIS mistakes will be the reason for a successful appeal in this 2nd trial which is so flawed it makes a mockery of the CA court system. (my bolding)

Saying "believe me" doesn't make it true.

Trial one is irrelevant - but there was one mistake there - allowing an incorrect jury instruction - designed by the man of the moment, the only lawyer new and fresh into the trial at a very late stage - Riordan - lawyer for the defendant - to be included.

IMHO Judge Fiddler made way too many rulings during trial 2 that supported the defense.The rules of discovery were broken many times by the defense & seemingly allowed to continue. It is difficult to appeal rulings that were in favor of the defendant.

For those who keep citing the "prior acts" (being the only suggestion made by Weinberg after the verdict) read the rulings that were made at the time -
http://www.lasuperiorcourt.org/courtnews/highProfile/HPDocumentList.aspx?title=People+vs.+Phillip+Spect or&casenum=BA255233&

(The site seems to be unavailable at the minute so I can't link to the specific documents)

jmo

[kennedy06]

Diplomatic rofl! You have read nothing yet; a man has to survive, well he sure has, he is the head honcho, or haven't you read that yet. They love him and they respect him. I agree with you on one fact, his appeal will be short, because it is obvious the faults Judge Fidler made won't take long to process and result in the successful appeal of Phil Spector:thumbsup:

In reply to this reponse of yours to Deannalynn's post, He is the head honcho as you say? They love and respect him who the other inmates? I mean I would think there are gangs there. He is the head honcho at NKSP?????! This is what you are implying? That is one tough prison from the video linked to back when he was moved there. Where did you read this??? That is quite a bold statement to make about someone in prison IMO.

[penguin01]

No, I don't have a problem reading comprehension! Do you? Why are you asking for background on a poster, surely that is personal. They are giving their opinion as you are. I have never heard of such a thing on these boards as posters asking for background on other posters, what is your point?

Once again you are clearly having trouble understanding the posts. nic99 said "believe me" - so I asked. Try to keep up if you are going to fuss. why are you responding for nic99 - are you his/her mommy?

[penguin01]

What background do you want to know about me. I have followed this trial on these boards for a while now and posted since Oct 08. I have researched extensively the facts of this trial and imo Phil Spector is innocent, what else do you need to know?

Nic I apppreciate the response Nic. Apparently Snooky thinks you're a poor soul who can't speak for yourself. Can't imagine why; the poor thing didn't even understand the question - but you seem intelligent and capable to me. We just agree to disagree.

When someone says "believe me" I tend to think - why? I do think that Judge Fidler has also followed the trial and he has researched too: he also seems intelligent and capable and well schooled in the law - so I guess I'll go with believing him in this case. PS will be staying put IMO. But again, thank you for your response.

[dref99]

Yeah well we get fed up with constant poisonous posts about PS; take it. It doesn't happen very often from the pro-PS people and only when they have had enough of the continual nastiness about PS; but hey, that's okay isn't it, BUT, actually, NO, it isn't. There are 2 sides to every story:rolleyes:

There are not always 2 sides to a story - quite often there is only one - the truth. Because Mr Spector refused (as is his right) to tell his story as to what happened on the night Lana Clarkson died, it was left in the hands of others to determine what the true story was - and it was resolved that Lana was murdered.

I see no valid way of suggesting that Phil received other than overwhelming opportunities to provide evidence that he did not murder Lana Clarkson. The defense of suicide was never likely to be sustained - the pathetic attempts by very few to show Lana as being suicidal were quickly rebutted. (Does anyone know why PunkinPie did not testify in Trial 2? That would create an interesting discussion.)

I can only assume that you keep attacking posters because there are no valid reasons to attack the trial verdict. If you don't want to read posts supporting the guilty verdict, supporting the fact that Phil Spector is now a convicted murderer and supporting the Clarkson family, I can only suggest you stay away from this topic. It is not compulsory to post on every thread on a message board.

jmo

[Anakerie]

:thumbsup:

Exactly my point; you ask us pro-PS posters the reasons for appeal and when we post them you don't want to discuss. So, why ask? You are obviously only interested in your point of the trial and not the other side and not open to any discussion, unless it agrees with your opinion:thumbdown: He may be serving his time at the moment in your words; but, mark my words, he will be free after the appeal:thumbsup:
If you feel this is over, why are you still posting on here on the appeals board?
I am here on this thread because there is a civil trial coming up. 2 of them in fact. One filed by Lana Clarkson's family against Phil and one filed by Phil against his first lawyer, Mr. Shapiro. I have a feeling we will be seeing more information about the civil issues before we see anything about an appeal being filed.

I have posted in the past about my opinion of the grounds for appeal that you and your friends keep talking about. Why should I post again if all you and the other fans of Phil simply ignore what I type? I'm not interested in rehashing the trial. It is over and done with. Appeals are notorious for taking a long time to work their way through the system, and historically appeals rarely set a convict free.

[Anakerie]

In reply to this reponse of yours to Deannalynn's post, He is the head honcho as you say? They love and respect him who the other inmates? I mean I would think there are gangs there. He is the head honcho at NKSP?????! This is what you are implying? That is one tough prison from the video linked to back when he was moved there. Where did you read this??? That is quite a bold statement to make about someone in prison IMO.
I would love to see a link to the source of this story... "Head honcho" indeed... I have a feeling it came from Rachelle... :rolleyes:

[My 2 Cents]

Diplomatic rofl! You have read nothing yet; a man has to survive, well he sure has, he is the head honcho, or haven't you read that yet. They love him and they respect him. I agree with you on one fact, his appeal will be short, because it is obvious the faults Judge Fidler made won't take long to process and result in the successful appeal of Phil Spector:thumbsup:

I believe the only person that has labeled Phil with the "Head Honcho" title and then provided the information that all the prisoners like him (or as you have stated "love him and respect him") is ONE . . . Karen Murdock, aka - Phil's Mother-in-Law, aka - Rachelle's Mom. Since Phil is probably NOT using his precious few phone calls to chat with his Mother-in-Law from prison, it is most likely that Karen received this "tid bit of info" directly from her daughter, Rachelle.

Below is a LINK to an article from the Pittsburgh Post Gazette, dated June 14th, where Karen Murdock is quoted using the term "Head Honcho" with regards to her son-in-law, Phil. It is in the last paragraph under the sub-heading: NO TIME FOR FRIENDS

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/09165/977308-84.stm

Unfortunately, Rachelle has NOT been the most RELIABLE SOURCE for dispersing any information that even slightly resembles any of the actual facts. If you haven't had the opportunity to watch the video interview she holds in her home with SAM RUBIN from the TV station KTLA, I highly recommend it. It is presented in (3) parts and shows Sam walking through the house, also the newly hired publicist, Hal Lifson speaks during part (3) and of course, Rachelle. Here is a LINk to (1) of the (3) parts to the video interview.

http://www.ktla.com/news/landing/ktla-video-rachel-spector-1,0,1864074.worldnowvideo

With regards to my comment, that Rachelle doesn't seem to convey "details" and "facts" of the trial very accurately, here are a few examples of things she states in the above interview:

Reasons Rachelle gives to Sam Rubin/KTLA viewers as to why her husband is innocent:

1. Phil's DNA wasn't even on the gun. How could he possibly shoot her in the mouth and not have left DNA on the gun?????

(ANS) Well, Rachelle - - - BECAUSE THE ONLY OTHER LIVING PERSON IN THE HOUSE WIPED DOWN THE ENTIRE GUN. THAT PERSON WAS PHIL. I wonder WHY he did that?

2. Lana's DNA was on the bullets. That meant SHE HAD TO HAVE LOADED THEM INTO THE GUN AND HANDLED THE GUN.

(ANS) Oops . . . Rachelle - tisk, tisk . .. YOU FORGOT TO MENTION to the viewers that the DNA found on the bullets was from her blood and tissue (not DNA from her fingers) that landed on the tip of the bullets (via the chamber) after it was shoved in her mouth and then fired inside her mouth.

3. Phillip was TRIED in the "COURT OF PUBLIC OPINION" and not in a court of law.

(ANS) Rachelle, . . . what PUBLIC OPINION? There were NO REPORTERS reporting on the 2nd trial. Rarely was there an article. Not until closing arguments did the reporters from the newspapers or TV ever seem interested.

4. Phillip did NOT have ANY GSR on HIM. How could he fire the gun and it NOT have left any GSR on him?

(ANS) Tisk, tisk again Rachelle. YOU FORGOT to tell the viewers that Phil was NOT EVER TESTED for GSR. He owns the guns, cleans the guns and lives in a house with 14 guns . . . there was no need to test him for GSR because he of course has GSR on his clothing - all his clothing. Even his OWN DEFENSE TEAM DIDN'T TEST HIM FOR GSR. WHY NOT? Because they knew they would find it.

AND ON AND ON SHE WENT twisting and manipulating the "facts".

And the DOZEN RED ROSES at the beginning of the interview . . . my guess is that the new publicist, Hal Lifson had those ordered prior to this interview and made sure the cameras zoomed in on them. Even reading the endearing card with a note "written by Phil". WHAT DID THAT NOTE EVEN MEAN? . . . . "ALTHOUGH I AM IN PRISON, I AM YOUR PRISONER OF LIFE". Does that mean the same as a guy calling his wife, "The OLD BALL AND CHAIN"? . . . "prisoner of life"???

[Deannalynn]

I am here on this thread because there is a civil trial coming up. 2 of them in fact. One filed by Lana Clarkson's family against Phil and one filed by Phil against his first lawyer, Mr. Shapiro. I have a feeling we will be seeing more information about the civil issues before we see anything about an appeal being filed.

I have posted in the past about my opinion of the grounds for appeal that you and your friends keep talking about. Why should I post again if all you and the other fans of Phil simply ignore what I type? I'm not interested in rehashing the trial. It is over and done with. Appeals are notorious for taking a long time to work their way through the system, and historically appeals rarely set a convict free.

Especially in the State of California. Could be years!
jmo

[bearwds]

My 2-cents... Thank you so much for the article and video link.

Disturbing.


bearwds

[dref99]

My 2-cents... Thank you so much for the article and video link.

Disturbing.


bearwds

My thanks also - I had seen the video - but not the news item - it is exceedingly strange how some people see marrying a murderer as finding fame and fortune :confused:


dref..

[RootBeer]

I don't buy it. I've heard of those songs - and the musician, the writer, the band, the singer - those may be musical geniuses. The producer? No. Some random technique in the background - nope - that's not why I like those songs. The words, emotion, harmonies, etc. - that's why people love those songs. Wall of Sound - might be something that adds to the sound - but no musical genius idea.

He had one idea, used it to gain power and prestige, used the power to let him exercise his violent controlling side, and went too far as he lost that power and prestige.

They remade the song with his stuff stripped out - I think that says a lot about what an 'incredible' technique it was.

Doesn't matter though - were he Mozart himself, and famous worldwide, murdering someone is still not OK.


Excuse me, but Phil Spector WROTE lyric to many songs, such as BE MY BABY. He wrote it for Ronnie. He wrote words and music and produced. Get it right.

[penguin01]

My 2-cents... Thank you so much for the article and video link.

Disturbing.


bearwds My feeling also - thanks - perfect post my2cents!:beer:

[vonna]

Excuse me, but Phil Spector WROTE lyric to many songs, such as BE MY BABY. He wrote it for Ronnie. He wrote words and music and produced. Get it right.

who knows? Maybe by spending the rest of his life in prison the solitude will inspire him to write more songs you can enjoy.

[Anakerie]

who knows? Maybe by spending the rest of his life in prison the solitude will inspire him to write more songs you can enjoy.

Maybe he can write a song or two for his wife to record so she can finally be famous for her singing. :wink:


ETA: Does anyone have any clue when the last song he wrote was recorded? Was it like back in the 60's?

[tulpje]

Maybe he can write a song or two for his wife to record so she can finally be famous for her singing. :wink:


ETA: Does anyone have any clue when the last song he wrote was recorded? Was it like back in the 60's?



His most recent released project has been "Silence Is Easy" by Starsailor, released in 2003


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phil_Spector

[kennedy06]

Excuse me, but Phil Spector WROTE lyric to many songs, such as BE MY BABY. He wrote it for Ronnie. He wrote words and music and produced. Get it right.

Get it right?:rolleyes:

OK lets get it right Root Beer, Phil co wrote the Song Be My Baby with Ellie Greenwhich, Jeffy Barry.

JMO

[Nic99]

Maybe he can write a song or two for his wife to record so she can finally be famous for her singing. :wink:


ETA: Does anyone have any clue when the last song he wrote was recorded? Was it like back in the 60's?

The last song he wrote was recorded in December 2007 and sung by Mutya Buena and Amy Winehouse, a great UK singer. Its called 'B Boy Baby' and Phil Spector was given song writing credits. I just wondered why are you asking, are you really interested? I thought you weren't interested in Phil's career:confused:

[Nic99]

Get it right?:rolleyes:

OK lets get it right Root Beer, Phil co wrote the Song Be My Baby with Ellie Greenwhich, Jeffy Barry.

JMO

Yes Phil co-wrote the song as many writers do. What is your point here? RootBeer did get it right; Phil wrote Be My Baby, with 2 other writers. She was correct in her answer. Yes, Phil did write some songs on his own and he also co-wrote some songs.

[Anakerie]

His most recent released project has been "Silence Is Easy" by Starsailor, released in 2003


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phil_Spector

Is that one that he wrote?

I am curious about the songs that he wrote, not just produced. And yes, Nic99. I am curious about the "talent" that the fans are so enthusiastic about. Because the majority of people had no clue who he was back in February of 2003 when his name hit the headlines. He's been in the background of the music industry for so long, he has no real "fame" outside the music industry.

I suppose that should make me curious about the fans here on this board, as in, are the fans in the music industry? Nah.. I'm sure if they were, they'd have told the rest of us by now.

[Anakerie]

The last song he wrote was recorded in December 2007 and sung by Mutya Buena and Amy Winehouse, a great UK singer. Its called 'B Boy Baby' and Phil Spector was given song writing credits. I just wondered why are you asking, are you really interested? I thought you weren't interested in Phil's career:confused:

Hmm... Nope, that song doesn't answer my question either: ""B Boy Baby" is a song written by Phil Spector (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phil_Spector), Ellie Greenwich (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ellie_Greenwich), Jeff Barry (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeff_Barry), and Angela Hunte"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B_Boy_Baby

I'm trying to find out when the last song that he wrote was recorded.. Not "co-wrote".

[Nic99]

Is that one that he wrote?

I am curious about the songs that he wrote, not just produced. And yes, Nic99. I am curious about the "talent" that the fans are so enthusiastic about. Because the majority of people had no clue who he was back in February of 2003 when his name hit the headlines. He's been in the background of the music industry for so long, he has no "fame" outside the music industry.

I suppose that should make me curious about the fans here on this board, as in, are the fans in the music industry? Nah.. I'm sure if they were, they'd have told the rest of us by now.

Okay, I am taking you as you have said... you are curious about songs he wrote or had song writing credits in, co-wrote. Well, here are some very famous examples for you, which I am sure you will recognise:

You've Lost That Lovin' Feeling
Spanish Harlem Song
Da Doo Ron Ron
Chapel of Love
Be My Baby
Baby, I Love You

Just to name a few songs, which I am sure, at least one of these songs has been played in every household in America and around the world. You asked the question and I am answering your question. I know for a fact he is a rare musical talent and there are certainly only a handful of people in this whole world who have songs that are household names, as his continue to be. That is pure musical talent. I bet you have one of his songs in your music collection and don't deny it, because I know you have......:thumbup:

imo of course

[kennedy06]

Yes Phil co-wrote the song as many writers do. What is your point here? RootBeer did get it right; Phil wrote Be My Baby, with 2 other writers. She was correct in her answer. Yes, Phil did write some songs on his own and he also co-wrote some songs.

:confused:

I just got it right by pointing out who the proper writers were for the song. I hope that helps your confusion about my post.

Thanks

[Nic99]

:confused:

I just got it right by pointing out who the proper writers were for the song. I hope that helps your confusion about my post.

Thanks

Yes and the proper writers, as you so call them, include Phil Spector.

[Anakerie]

Okay, I am taking you as you have said... you are curious about songs he wrote or had song writing credits in, co-wrote. Well, here are some very famous examples for you, which I am sure you will recognise:

You've Lost That Lovin' Feeling
Spanish Harlem Song
Da Doo Ron Ron
Chapel of Love
Be My Baby
Baby, I Love You

Just to name a few songs, which I am sure, at least one of these songs has been played in every household in America and around the world. You asked the question and I am answering your question. I know for a fact he is a rare musical talent and there are certainly only a handful of people in this whole world who have songs that are household names, as his continue to be. That is pure musical talent. I bet you have one of his songs in your music collection and don't deny it, because I know you have......:thumbup:

imo of course

Of course those songs are familiar to me. After all, I grew up in the same era as Phil did. What I was asking for was information on the most current songs that he wrote, and wrote alone. You see, I don't believe his talent is all that rare, Nic. I am sure there are many other artists who have written songs that are just as recognizable as those you listed.

Now, how many of those that you listed were written by him, alone?

ETA: I apologize for asking a question that has taken the discussion so far off track of the subject of this thread: "legal questions about the appeal or the civil cases"...

[kennedy06]

He was convicted of shooting Lana Clarkson and is serving a 19 year prison sentence beginning his with reception starting at North Kern State Prison in Ca. Those are facts along with many songs written, co written or produced by PS. Ther are many other facts, he was married several times... he went to Fairfax High.... Still in the end though as we post he is sitting in a prison cell, no post can change that.

All these facts can be noted on wikipedia, or latest news articles concerning his conviction.

No matter how much I may like PS music (with the exception of the music of the 70's with Dion or Leonard C.) it can't change the fact he is now a convicted Felon.

JMO

[Nic99]

Of course those songs are familiar to me. After all, I grew up in the same era as Phil did. What I was asking for was information on the most current songs that he wrote, and wrote alone. You see, I don't believe his talent is all that rare, Nic. I am sure there are many other artists who have written songs that are just as recognizable as those you listed.

Now, how many of those that you listed were written by him, alone?

What is the difference to be honest. You obviously don't really want any answers to your question. Okay, a song he wrote [B]on his own[B] for example, as it seems to be so important to you, is the very famous:

To Know Him is To Love Him

If you look at the music industry, you will see that the majority of hit songs out there are actually co-written; that does not take anything away from the talent of the writers who get together with their joint expertise to produce a hit single/albumn. That is how it works and that is how household hits are made and live on and on.

[Anakerie]

He was convicted of shooting Lana Clarkson and is serving a 19 year prison sentence beginning his with reception starting at North Kern State Prison in Ca. Those are facts along with many songs written, co written or produced by PS. Ther are many other facts, he was married several times... he went to Fairfax High.... Still in the end though as we post he is sitting in a prison cell, no post can change that.

All these facts can be noted on wikipedia, or latest news articles concerning his conviction.

JMO
You're right, Kennedy... Again, I apologize for causing the discussion to go so far off track. All we can do is wait for some news of one of the civil trials to hit the news. Sometimes it seems the civil side of the justice system moves extremely slow, doesn't it?

[Anakerie]

What is the difference to be honest. You obviously don't really want any answers to your question. Okay, a song he wrote [b]on his own[b] for example, as it seems to be so important to you, is the very famous:

To Know Him is To Love Him

If you look at the music industry, you will see that the majority of hit songs out there are actually co-written; that does not take anything away from the talent of the writers who get together with their joint expertise to produce a hit single/albumn. That is how it works and that is how household hits are made and live on and on.
Never mind, Nic. I guess my personal opinion of his "fame" will have to do for me... He has nothing "current" to his credit.

[kennedy06]

You're right, Kennedy... Again, I apologize for causing the discussion to go so far off track. All we can do is wait for some news of one of the civil trials to hit the news. Sometimes it seems the civil side of the justice system moves extremely slow, doesn't it?

No problem Anakerie I was sort of curious myself after you asked.

Yes, but I think the wheels are in motion as we speak for the civil trial, we are just not fully aware of the details as of yet. JMO

Thanks and yes I will make an effort stick to trial and appeals also thanks :smile:

[Nic99]

No problem Anakerie I was sort of curious myself after you asked.

Yes, but I think the wheels are in motion as we speak for the civil trial, we are just not fully aware of the details as of yet. JMO

Thanks and yes I will make an effort stick to trial and appeals also thanks :smile:

And the wheels are in motion for the appeal trial.

Sheesh, why do people ask questions about Phil's musical background and then don't want the answers; very frustrating at times.....

[Anakerie]

And the wheels are in motion for the appeal trial.

Sheesh, why do people ask questions about Phil's musical background and then don't want the answers; very frustrating at times.....

I'm sorry Nic. I guess you misunderstood what I was asking. I asked for something current that Phil had written, you answered with old songs or songs that he co-wrote with other artists. Since you couldn't come up with a current song or recording, I have to assume that Phil hasn't done anything on his own in many years. And that reinforces my own opinion of Phil Spector.

Now, I have a question for you. What is an "appeal" trial?

[Nic99]

I'm sorry Nic. I guess you misunderstood what I was asking. I asked for something current that Phil had written, you answered with old songs or songs that he co-wrote with other artists. Since you couldn't come up with a current song or recording, I have to assume that Phil hasn't done anything on his own in many years. And that reinforces my own opinion of Phil Spector.

Now, I have a question for you. What is an "appeal" trial?

For pity's sake what is your problem?

[Anakerie]

I found an interesting website that details the appeals process here in California... It might remove some confusion...
http://www.avvo.com/legal-guides/ugc/the-process-of-a-criminal-appeal-in-california


Here is a brief summary of the process of a criminal appeal. 1. Notice of Appeal

After receiving a judgment in the superior court, a party can file a notice of appeal to have a higher court review the superior court proceedings. A notice of appeal is a relatively simple form that is filed in the Superior Court which informs the Superior Court and the Court of Appeal that you are challenging the trial court’s judgment. Depending upon the type of case you are challenging, the notice of appeal generally must be filed within the first 30-60 days following the Superior Court judgment.
2. Preparation of Court Transcripts
After a notice of appeal is filed in the Superior Court, the court reporters are ordered prepare a copy of the clerk’s file (the “Clerks Transcripts) and a copy of the reporter’s notes from the court hearings (the “Reporters Transcripts.)
3. Appellant’s Opening Brief
After the transcripts are completed, the criminal appellate attorney will review the court transcripts to determine what, if any, legal errors were made in the trial court. The attorney will then submit a written "brief" to the Court of Appeal explaining what errors occurred and asking the Court for a specific remedy.
4. Respondent’s Brief
The attorney for the respondent will review both the court transcripts and the appellant’s opening brief. The opposing attorney will then submit their own brief contesting the legal errors claimed by the appellant.
5. Appellant’s Reply Brief

Because the appellant has the burden of persuasion on appeal, the courts permit the appellant to file a second brief called a “Reply Brief”. In a reply brief, the appellate attorney can respond to points raised by the opposing side. Typically, no new issues can be raised in the reply brief.

6. Oral Argument

After briefing is complete, the attorneys may request oral argument. Oral argument is a court hearing where the two appellate attorneys discuss the issues with three Court of Appeal justices. Arguments are typically very short in duration, and tend to be academic in nature, focusing on legal issues. No witnesses are called and no new evidence is introduced. In criminal cases, if the defendant is in custody, the defendant will not be permitted to attend oral argument.

7. Court Ruling

A panel of three Court of Appeal justices review the transcripts, the briefs filed, and conduct their own independent research. Based upon their review of the arguments and the law, the justices will then prepare a written ruling. The written ruling typically contains a summary of the facts of the case, a summary of the arguments raised, and analysis from the Court as to whether or not the trial court’s judgment needs to be corrected.

I would hazard a guess that step 1 is either in process or has been done. The guide says 30 to 60 days for that step and it hasn't even been 30 days since the sentencing. (Sentencing is considered the "judgement" in a criminal case, so since Phil was sentenced on May 30th, the 30 to 60 day count starts there.)

ETA: Note this is from an "answer" site, no copyright stuff there..

[Nic99]

Yes, I think we all know the appeal processes. The reasons for appeal are a much bigger issue. Hey, we can all copy and paste, but, individual thought processes and opinions, they are much more interesting imo. Shame, people aren't prepared to discuss with pro-PS on this board, isn't that what these boards are about.

[Anakerie]

For pity's sake what is your problem?
lol, I have no problem... I am in California and am unfamiliar with the term "appeal trial" that you used... I guess it's something that happens where ever it is you reside...

Oh well.. Check out the post I just put in the thread that gives the steps in the appeals process here in California.

:seeya: See ya! I'm headed out to have some fun!

[vonna]

Yes, I think we all know the appeal processes. The reasons for appeal are a much bigger issue. Hey, we can all copy and paste, but, individual thought processes and opinions, they are much more interesting imo. Shame, people aren't prepared to discuss with pro-PS on this board, isn't that what these boards are about.

There is nothing to debate. He has been found guilty and will remain in prison for the rest of his life. Now I eagerly await the civil trial.

[Nic99]

There is nothing to debate. He has been found guilty and will remain in prison for the rest of his life. Now I eagerly await the civil trial.

There is plenty to debate, else what is the point of us being here? AJ's prejudicial opening argument; PBA witness of DO which could not be cross-examined in 2nd trial; hearsay testimony of VT; 5 PBAs which were highly flawed as should never have been allowed. Boy, Judge Fidler will be held accountable for the prejudicial way he allowed this trial to continue and an appeal will be successful.

[Lyndawitha"Y]

It's all well and good to remember PS's past accolades..but I wonder what that has to do with his conviction for the murder of Lana?...The monetary gains he got for his past talents enabled him to postpone for many years the eventual verdict in the 2nd trial...Now my question really is on what grounds are there for appeal of said verdict???I dont mean opinion grounds..like allowing prior bad act testimony..as that has been upheld in all cases I have seen and heard about..I want to know exactly the blatant points that may infact cause an overturn of this verdict???

TYIA..I am not a legal eagle but Judge Fidler was very fair in his rulings..and given Spector had the best of the best in both trials..he simply cannot claim "Ineffective Council"???So Please enlighten me..

TY

LMS

[Nic99]

[QUOTE=Lyndawitha"Y;13210480]It's all well and good to remember PS's past accolades..but I wonder what that has to do with his conviction for the murder of Lana?...The monetary gains he got for his past talents enabled him to postpone for many years the eventual verdict in the 2nd trial...Now my question really is on what grounds are there for appeal of said verdict???I dont mean opinion grounds..like allowing prior bad act testimony..as that has been upheld in all cases I have seen and heard about..I want to know exactly the blatant points that may infact cause an overturn of this verdict???

TYIA..I am not a legal eagle but Judge Fidler was very fair in his rulings..and given Spector had the best of the best in both trials..he simply cannot claim "Ineffective Council"???So Please enlighten me..

TY

Okay, lets start at the beginning. The opening argument of AJ was highly prejudicial against PS and this is not allowed in court. Please look back at the argument and you will see that this is not how a case should and is allowed to be stated. He tried to make the jury very prejudicial against PS in what he was saying and went over the line of what is allowed.....

That is point one; please look back and you will see, that is a very valid point and Judge Fidler should not have allowed it imo.

[Lyndawitha"Y]

There is plenty to debate, else what is the point of us being here? AJ's prejudicial opening argument; PBA witness of DO which could not be cross-examined in 2nd trial; hearsay testimony of VT; 5 PBAs which were highly flawed as should never have been allowed. Boy, Judge Fidler will be held accountable for the prejudicial way he allowed this trial to continue and an appeal will be successful.

Now, that bolded comment you made has be wondering about Case Law that cites that Prosecutors are not to be prejudicial..OF course they are, they believe the defendent is guilty as charged???I dont believe I have every heard one Prosecutor NOT be Prejudice/biased ..otherwise, where would the "Adversarial System" of your Justice System be? If there wasnt such biased feelings about their guilt..then why even prosecute???

Dont think AJ's opening statement would be grounds for any appeal..at all..JMOO

PBA..witnesses..were only the ones that fit the similar circumstances..not all those other wild and wooley gun tooting episodes he is known for..so I cant see where that is an appealable issue either...

Unable to cross exam the witness (PBA witness who died)..again, the whole testimony was replayed including a very strong cross exam by a top notch defense team ( Dream Team a la Spector)....Cant claim Spector couldnt/didnt confront that witness either??..

Fidler..hummm..he was IMO more than fair in his rulings..actually he had more patience that most Judges listening to arguments ...Doubt that will fly either...

The only thing that may happen would be his "Instructions" to the jury..which unfortunately we were not privy to in PS2..So jury is out on that appealable point..

LMS

[Lyndawitha"Y]

[

Okay, lets start at the beginning. The opening argument of AJ was highly prejudicial against PS and this is not allowed in court. Please look back at the argument and you will see that this is not how a case should and is allowed to be stated. He tried to make the jury very prejudicial against PS in what he was saying and went over the line of what is allowed.....

That is point one; please look back and you will see, that is a very valid point and Judge Fidler should not have allowed it imo.

Please cite some sort of case law that prohibits a Prosecutor from claiming whatevers???His statements are not testimony, they are opinions and claims by the Pros...and what they hope to prove..no more no less..So where can I find the LAW that states this is NOT ALLOWED??Please enlighten me..TYIA

LMS

[Nic99]

Now, that bolded comment you made has be wondering about Case Law that cites that Prosecutors are not to be prejudicial..OF course they are, they believe the defendent is guilty as charged???I dont believe I have every heard one Prosecutor NOT be Prejudice/biased ..otherwise, where would the "Adversarial System" of your Justice System be? If there wasnt such biased feelings about their guilt..then why even prosecute???

Dont think AJ's opening statement would be grounds for any appeal..at all..JMOO

PBA..witnesses..were only the ones that fit the similar circumstances..not all those other wild and wooley gun tooting episodes he is known for..so I cant see where that is an appealable issue either...

Unable to cross exam the witness (PBA witness who died)..again, the whole testimony was replayed including a very strong cross exam by a top notch defense team ( Dream Team a la Spector)....Cant claim Spector couldnt/didnt confront that witness either??..

Fidler..hummm..he was IMO more than fair in his rulings..actually he had more patience that most Judges listening to arguments ...Doubt that will fly either...

The only thing that may happen would be his "Instructions" to the jury..which unfortunately we were not privy to in PS2..So jury is out on that appealable point..

LMS

Actually you bolded that first comment, not me, but hey, you may not think it is valid but I know it is.

Okay, the PBA's, well a judge should NEVER have allowed a testimony from a witness that could not be cross-examined, so there lays a very strong argument imo. The other PBAs were not exact enough in their testimonies and are subsequently flawed.

AJ's opening argument was highly prejudicial and this is NOT allowed as it was, for obvious reasons. He may have been the prosecution, but he went over the line and will be held accountable for that.

Just a few arguments for a successful appeal and I am SURE there will be many more. Judge Fidler's instructions to the Jury, well he slipped up big time on the 1st trial, so, as you say the Jury is out on that one and we await the repercussions.....

Thanks for the opportunity for some discussion and I do appreciate that.

Nic

[dref99]

Yes, I think we all know the appeal processes. The reasons for appeal are a much bigger issue. Hey, we can all copy and paste, but, individual thought processes and opinions, they are much more interesting imo. Shame, people aren't prepared to discuss with pro-PS on this board, isn't that what these boards are about.

I doubt your reply is accurate for most message board situations - we are not studying for a PhD on this board Nic99 - we are looking for answers - and copy/paste is much more relevant that some individual thought processes that come up with the wrong answer (As per looking for current PS songs, written alone, and receiving, in reply, everything except what was requested.)

Many thanks for the details Anakerie - explains the process very simply, which is certainly wanted.

2 & 3 look as if there could be a long time involved and this statement can never be emphasised enough
After the transcripts are completed, the criminal appellate attorney will review the court transcripts to determine what, if any, legal errors were made in the trial court. Rachelle's list of evidence has already been decided and has nothing to do with legal errors.

jmo

[True2Blues]

Hmm... Nope, that song doesn't answer my question either: ""B Boy Baby" is a song written by Phil Spector (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phil_Spector), Ellie Greenwich (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ellie_Greenwich), Jeff Barry (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeff_Barry), and Angela Hunte"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B_Boy_Baby

I'm trying to find out when the last song that he wrote was recorded.. Not "co-wrote".

Actually, in Mick Brown's book, he noted that Spector demanded co-writing credit for a lot of songs he produced, even though he didn't have anything to do with the writing.

[vonna]

Actually, in Mick Brown's book, he noted that Spector demanded co-writing credit for a lot of songs he produced, even though he didn't have anything to do with the writing.

Why doesn't that surprise me????

[RootBeer]

I hope one of his kids send him a Father's Day card. :wub:

[vonna]

Does this Nat person know?

I would think pretending to be Bruce Cutler or any other lawyer is illegal.

She's desperate for Bruce to contact her so she can marry him is what I gathered from this blog. This is the same woman who stole from Leonard Cohen and has a 7.9 million dollar judgement against her.

http://philspectorandkelleylynch.blogspot.com/


It just goes to show how far some people will go in order to fake a groundswell of support for the obviously guilty Spector. It won't work and neither will the appeal.

[Details]

I hope one of his kids send him a Father's Day card. :wub:I'm sure any father who deserved the name would get a card. Sad but true that some do not, show themselves not to be a father by a lack of love, support, the barest minimums of human compassion.

[NotAgain]

I'm sure any father who deserved the name would get a card. Sad but true that some do not, show themselves not to be a father by a lack of love, support, the barest minimums of human compassion.

PS is not deserving of a Father's Day card. He treated his kids like dirt. Kids deserve unconditional love and support.

Thanks M2C for the links.

[vonna]

Glad to hear the site has been removed.

Will wonders never cease! Finally we have a point of agreement.

[My 2 Cents]

I hope one of his kids send him a Father's Day card. :wub:

I am curious why you would even leave this post. (And please don't respond with: "I can post whatever I want", that is not my point.) It sounds as though you are familiar with this case, as you have voiced an opinion about the innocence of Phil - I can only assume you have made this decision after a close review of the facts and evidence in at least one of the two trials.

However, if you have in fact followed this trial closely you would certainly be aware of all the statements made by 3 of Phil Spector's 4 children (posts on this forum, during radio interviews, TV and Newspaper articles/interviews, myspace posts, etc) that have stated OVER AND OVER AGAIN that his children have tried to contact their Dad, numerous times, through letters, cards and phone calls. They have called their Dad on his birthday and Father's Day - Gary has stated he does this EVERY YEAR, they have sent him numerous letters and tried numerous ways to reach out to him and show support AND PHIL HAS IGNORED ALL OF THOSE ATTEMPTS . . . for decades. Even Louis attending both trials on a regular basis, and Phil totally ignoring his presence there as he arrives, enters and exits at breaks and at lunch, and then leaves at the end of the day - walking past Louis and ignoring him completely - - - I know - I've watched Phil do it lots of times. Phil doesn't even give him eye contact.

SO MY QUESTION IS . . . WHY? WHY WOULD YOU WANT THESE KIDS TO SEND THEIR DAD A FATHER'S DAY CARD? . . . SO THEY CAN GET REJECTED AGAIN WITH NO ACKNOWLEDGMENT FROM PHIL, AFTER YEARS OF TRYING - SO THEY CAN FEEL "KICKED IN THE GUT", YET AGAIN, ONE MORE TIME? How many attempts by his kids, do you think is enough? Seriously, how many?

Perhaps a post that read:
I hope Phil sends each of his kids a card this Father's Day (or on their birthdays or just send a card period - on any day) . . . it would be a great start for mending their Father/Child relationship that these kids seem to be starving for all these years from Phil. . . even though in my opinion, Phil doesn't deserve it and has been a fool to throw all those opportunities away.

[B]When do you think it will FINALLY be PHIL'S TURN to START extending a loving hand out to his kids?

When will it FINALLY be PHIL's RESPONSIBILITY to acknowledge all the efforts made repeatedly by his kids and reply back? Call them? Write them? . . . When?

[kennedy06]

Bravo my2cents Bravo, well said. :smile:

[True2Blues]

I am curious why you would even leave this post. (And please don't respond with: "I can post whatever I want", that is not my point.) It sounds as though you are familiar with this case, as you have voiced an opinion about the innocence of Phil - I can only assume you have made this decision after a close review of the facts and evidence in at least one of the two trials.

However, if you have in fact followed this trial closely you would certainly be aware of all the statements made by 3 of Phil Spector's 4 children (posts on this forum, during radio interviews, TV and Newspaper articles/interviews, myspace posts, etc) that have stated OVER AND OVER AGAIN that his children have tried to contact their Dad, numerous times, through letters, cards and phone calls. They have called their Dad on his birthday and Father's Day - Gary has stated he does this EVERY YEAR, they have sent him numerous letters and tried numerous ways to reach out to him and show support AND PHIL HAS IGNORED ALL OF THOSE ATTEMPTS . . . for decades. Even Louis attending both trials on a regular basis, and Phil totally ignoring his presence there as he arrives, enters and exits at breaks and at lunch, and then leaves at the end of the day - walking past Louis and ignoring him completely - - - I know - I've watched Phil do it lots of times. Phil doesn't even give him eye contact.

SO MY QUESTION IS . . . WHY? WHY WOULD YOU WANT THESE KIDS TO SEND THEIR DAD A FATHER'S DAY CARD? . . . SO THEY CAN GET REJECTED AGAIN WITH NO ACKNOWLEDGMENT FROM PHIL, AFTER YEARS OF TRYING - SO THEY CAN FEEL "KICKED IN THE GUT", YET AGAIN, ONE MORE TIME? How many attempts by his kids, do you think is enough? Seriously, how many?

Perhaps a post that read:
I hope Phil sends each of his kids a card this Father's Day (or on their birthdays or just send a card period - on any day) . . . it would be a great start for mending their Father/Child relationship that these kids seem to be starving for all these years from Phil. . . even though in my opinion, Phil doesn't deserve it and has been a fool to throw all those opportunities away.

[B]When do you think it will FINALLY be PHIL'S TURN to START extending a loving hand out to his kids?

When will it FINALLY be PHIL's RESPONSIBILITY to acknowledge all the efforts made repeatedly by his kids and reply back? Call them? Write them? . . . When?


If he sees some way in which his sons can do something for him while he spends the rest of his life in jail, he may contact them. Since he didn't need anything from then while he was out, he couldn't be bothered.

[NotAgain]

As Kennedy said, bravo M2C bravo.

One poignant moment during PS2 that spoke volumes of PS being cardworthy is when Donte and son were permitted to have the son's picture taken with PS. IIRC, it was the first time Donte's teenaged son got to meet his grandfather.

After picture was taken with PS, PS and RS get in their car and go to lunch.... leaving Donte and his son behind. :crying: Not exactly a Hallmark moment.

[Nic99]

Will wonders never cease! Finally we have a point of agreement.

This day will go down in history! :scared:

[NotAgain]

I checked 'Breaking News'.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hnzHtm1jhL4

[Anakerie]

I checked 'Breaking News'.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hnzHtm1jhL4

ROFL!! Thank you, NotAgain... That song fits!

~~
My 2 Cents: Excellent post about the "Fathers day" thing. Phil himself built the wall between himself and his children.

[NotAgain]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NzlG28B-R8Y

Did PS write this? :scared:

[dref99]

Back in the real cyber world - the web address for the LA Court high profile cases has a minor change. This is the link that currently works
http://www.lasuperiorcourt.org/courtnews/ui/HPDocumentList.aspx?title=People+vs.+Phillip+Spect or&casenum=BA255233&date=2008-11-03%2009:48:13

or to be sure of the right address, follow the links from here
http://www.lasuperiorcourt.org/courtnews/ui/main.aspx

Details of the arguments for and against the 1101(b) - prior bad acts evidence is one of the issues covered in the listed pdf items.

The legality of this evidence was tested before both trials - so IMO not looking good from the appeal aspect.


jmo

[vonna]

If the shoe fits! And in this case it fits well!:thumbsup:

It certainly does, NM.

[RootBeer]

I am curious why you would even leave this post. (And please don't respond with: "I can post whatever I want", that is not my point.) It sounds as though you are familiar with this case, as you have voiced an opinion about the innocence of Phil - I can only assume you have made this decision after a close review of the facts and evidence in at least one of the two trials.

However, if you have in fact followed this trial closely you would certainly be aware of all the statements made by 3 of Phil Spector's 4 children (posts on this forum, during radio interviews, TV and Newspaper articles/interviews, myspace posts, etc) that have stated OVER AND OVER AGAIN that his children have tried to contact their Dad, numerous times, through letters, cards and phone calls. They have called their Dad on his birthday and Father's Day - Gary has stated he does this EVERY YEAR, they have sent him numerous letters and tried numerous ways to reach out to him and show support AND PHIL HAS IGNORED ALL OF THOSE ATTEMPTS . . . for decades. Even Louis attending both trials on a regular basis, and Phil totally ignoring his presence there as he arrives, enters and exits at breaks and at lunch, and then leaves at the end of the day - walking past Louis and ignoring him completely - - - I know - I've watched Phil do it lots of times. Phil doesn't even give him eye contact.

SO MY QUESTION IS . . . WHY? WHY WOULD YOU WANT THESE KIDS TO SEND THEIR DAD A FATHER'S DAY CARD? . . . SO THEY CAN GET REJECTED AGAIN WITH NO ACKNOWLEDGMENT FROM PHIL, AFTER YEARS OF TRYING - SO THEY CAN FEEL "KICKED IN THE GUT", YET AGAIN, ONE MORE TIME? How many attempts by his kids, do you think is enough? Seriously, how many?

Perhaps a post that read:
I hope Phil sends each of his kids a card this Father's Day (or on their birthdays or just send a card period - on any day) . . . it would be a great start for mending their Father/Child relationship that these kids seem to be starving for all these years from Phil. . . even though in my opinion, Phil doesn't deserve it and has been a fool to throw all those opportunities away.

[B]When do you think it will FINALLY be PHIL'S TURN to START extending a loving hand out to his kids?

When will it FINALLY be PHIL's RESPONSIBILITY to acknowledge all the efforts made repeatedly by his kids and reply back? Call them? Write them? . . . When?

Whoever is the better person can send the card. jmo

[Anakerie]

Whoever is the better person can send the card. jmo
Just from being able to post with Gary and Louis on here and reading a bit about Donte and Nicole, my guess is that those four kids are far better people than their father. We all know how much the sons wanted to "connect" with Phil just from what was posted on these threads since the beginnings of PS1, and I would guess that Nicole, as well, would like to have a real relationship with her father.

[Anakerie]

Back in the real cyber world - the web address for the LA Court high profile cases has a minor change. This is the link that currently works
http://www.lasuperiorcourt.org/courtnews/ui/HPDocumentList.aspx?title=People+vs.+Phillip+Spect or&casenum=BA255233&date=2008-11-03%2009:48:13

or to be sure of the right address, follow the links from here
http://www.lasuperiorcourt.org/courtnews/ui/main.aspx

Details of the arguments for and against the 1101(b) - prior bad acts evidence is one of the issues covered in the listed pdf items.

The legality of this evidence was tested before both trials - so IMO not looking good from the appeal aspect.


jmo
Thank you for the new links to the docs, Dref.. It's much appreciated.

[warhorse46]

Here it is! The mug some of us have been waiting for. Phil's book in mug shot. Boy does he ever look different without his outrageous wigs.

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/mugshots/phil2009spector1.html

[Nic99]

Here it is! The mug some of us have been waiting for. Phil's book in mug shot. Boy does he ever look different without his outrageous wigs.

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/mugshots/phil2009spector1.html

That has already been discussed at length by some posters a while back on these boards. Don't know if the threads are still up for you to look at.

[warhorse46]

That has already been discussed at length by some posters a while back on these boards. Don't know if the threads are still up for you to look at.



Didn't see it on the Phil Spector board which is locked & CW told me to post it here. If you wish not to discuss the mug shot any further then please feel free to click on by. Wonder how PS is enjoying his prison meals & having no control over his life? Being told when he can eat, when he can sleep, when he can get out of his cell & for how long. Must be a bummer for him since he craves control.

[Anakerie]

Didn't see it on the Phil Spector board which is locked & CW told me to post it here. If you wish not to discuss the mug shot any further then please feel free to click on by. Wonder how PS is enjoying his prison meals & having no control over his life? Being told when he can eat, when he can sleep, when he can get out of his cell & for how long. Must be a bummer for him since he craves control.
Oh but hadn't you heard? Phil is the "head honcho" in there so he's doing very well according to Rachelle and her Mom... :rolleyes:

He's also had to give up self-medicating himself for all of his ills.. That's got to be a bummer for him too.

[warhorse46]

Oh but hadn't you heard? Phil is the "head honcho" in there so he's doing very well according to Rachelle and her Mom... :rolleyes:

He's also had to give up self-medicating himself for all of his ills.. That's got to be a bummer for him too.


Head Honcho huh---yeah right. Only in his imagination. The head honcho is the Warden & I doubt seriously PS has even seen much less spoken to him. His days are filled with physical & mental exams, strip searches, searches of his cell, once or twice a week showers which are timed & last approx 5 minutes, etc. Yep it really must be a bummer not to be able to lay his hands on the varied assorted drugs he claimed he needed anytime he desires. He must wait for a bonafied doctor to determine he really needs the drug, to order them & a licensed nurse to dispense them as ordered on a strict schedule.

[vonna]

I sincerely hope PS is in prison for the rest of his life. IMO that is exactly where he should be.

Even by some miracle if he should be alive when he has served his time - his "life" as he has known will be over. A pretty dim prospect and one that he has earned.

[Details]

I think we sometimes underestimate the degree to which simply being in prison is pure punishment. No control, living with nothing but the worst criminals, crappy food, no AC, no nice mattress, no recliner, no deciding you want a drink and grabbing it - the smallest pleasures in life are gone along with the best.

For a control freak, for someone used to the best - it must be even worse than for the average person.

[warhorse46]

Even by some miracle if he should be alive when he has served his time - his "life" as he has known will be over. A pretty dim prospect and one that he has earned.





Yep. His precious castle will have probably been sold to satisfy debts. Few, if any, people will associate with him. He will no longer be considered a Gold Member of the clubs, if he can even get in the front doors.

[warhorse46]

I think we sometimes underestimate the degree to which simply being in prison is pure punishment. No control, living with nothing but the worst criminals, crappy food, no AC, no nice mattress, no recliner, no deciding you want a drink and grabbing it - the smallest pleasures in life are gone along with the best.

For a control freak, for someone used to the best - it must be even worse than for the average person.


And in PS's case, no wigs, no platform shoes, no edwardian special made clothing, no servants to wait on him hand & foot.

[Deannalynn]

Yep. His precious castle will have probably been sold to satisfy debts. Few, if any, people will associate with him. He will no longer be considered a Gold Member of the clubs, if he can even get in the front doors.

He won't be standing at any front door for the next 19 years. Cept for his private domain. His lock up home away from his infamous castle.:sneaky:
JMO

[Anakerie]

He won't be standing at any front door for the next 19 years. Cept for his private domain. His lock up home away from his infamous castle.:sneaky:
JMO

If he survives that long, he could be in there for longer than 19 years. That's just when he becomes eligible for a parole hearing... His first... No guarantees he'd be paroled at his first hearing. Especially if he continues to deny what he did.

[Nic99]

If he survives that long, he could be in there for longer than 19 years. That's just when he becomes eligible for a parole hearing... His first... No guarantees he'd be paroled at his first hearing. Especially if he continues to deny what he did.

I wouldn't dwell on any possible parole hearing, because he will be free after appeal within the next 12 months imo.:thumbsup:

[Details]

I wouldn't dwell on any possible parole hearing, because he will be free after appeal within the next 12 months imo.:thumbsup:Yep! And we'll find a new way to make gasoline from water and sweettarts, it'll turn out music does make the world go round, and all murderers are to be set free because we can cure them with our minds!

:lol:

[Nic99]

Imo, it is never good to constantly strive for an untainable position especially when it has been proven he won't win any appeal. Might as well believe you might win the lottery.

Uhh, it hasn't been proven yet. There are plenty of grounds for appeal as I have tried to state on here before. They are solid grounds and all firm points for a successful appeal. Roll on - I can't wait. This is my opinion and don't believe it is unattainable (as we say over the pond).

[Details]

Uhh, it hasn't been proven yet. There are plenty of grounds for appeal as I have tried to state on here before. They are solid grounds and all firm points for a successful appeal. Roll on - I can't wait. This is my opinion and don't believe it is unattainable (as we say over the pond).And in a year, 2, 3, 5, 10, when it has all failed - will you be realizing your beliefs were wrong - or will you be just repeating the same about the next case - I always wonder - and I'll never know, since we'll all have moved on.

Plenty of time and experience shows - there's no appeal here. Nothing remotely in the slightest way close to an appealable issue. They'll file them, some supporters might blog about them, wait for the result, look to the next one, be sure this is the one that will work - and then fall off, stop watching - and instead say how sure they are that this new case is a huge injustice, and will be successfully appealed! A pattern I've seen over and over. Some posters even have a long list of their cases they are sure will eventually win that appeal.

Reality is - the case was solid, every decision has tons of precedent behind it, particularly the PBAs, the judge has a long record of not being overturned, the defense was given tons of leeway, and the appeal I've no doubt at all will fail as nearly all of them do - as appeals with far better grounds do.

[Details]

add no sleep, no decent food, no drugs whenever he feels like it, no alcohol, no women to abuse, no friends, constant state of fear and will die in prison;

did I leave anything out? Fear of abuse by the criminals he is housed with. I'm sure the guards will do their job right - but that won't eliminate the natural fear.

[warhorse46]

He won't be standing at any front door for the next 19 years. Cept for his private domain. His lock up home away from his infamous castle.:sneaky:
JMO




And he can't stand there until the guards give him permission to do so.

[Nic99]

And in a year, 2, 3, 5, 10, when it has all failed - will you be realizing your beliefs were wrong - or will you be just repeating the same about the next case - I always wonder - and I'll never know, since we'll all have moved on.

Plenty of time and experience shows - there's no appeal here. Nothing remotely in the slightest way close to an appealable issue. They'll file them, some supporters might blog about them, wait for the result, look to the next one, be sure this is the one that will work - and then fall off, stop watching - and instead say how sure they are that this new case is a huge injustice, and will be successfully appealed! A pattern I've seen over and over. Some posters even have a long list of their cases they are sure will eventually win that appeal.

Reality is - the case was solid, every decision has tons of precedent behind it, particularly the PBAs, the judge has a long record of not being overturned, the defense was given tons of leeway, and the appeal I've no doubt at all will fail as nearly all of them do - as appeals with far better grounds do.

I have NEVER followed any other trial apart from this one and probably never will. I have my opinions about this case and yes they are strong opinions and different to yours, but I am not who you describe above and never will be.

Your reality is your opinion only and mine is mine. I believe PS is innocent of 2nd degree murder and should not be judged by events 30 yrs past. Crikey, that is ALL they had; the scientific evidence was never enough and they had to clutch at these straws from yrs past to get a guilty verdict. Adrianno DeSouza, well enough said really. He doesn't have a great history and his English wasn't that great either; not a credible witness imo. AJ, highly prejudicial, you may say, as a Prosecutor should be, but no a Prosecutor is not allowed to prejudice the jury in such a way as he did and this is a point that should have been addressed at his opening speech particularly. DO - enough said, really there and on and on and on...

[Details]

I have NEVER followed any other trial apart from this one and probably never will. I have my opinions about this case and yes they are strong opinions and different to yours, but I am not who you describe above and never will be.

Your reality is your opinion only and mine is mine. I believe PS is innocent of 2nd degree murder and should not be judged by events 30 yrs past. Crikey, that is ALL they had; the scientific evidence was never enough and they had to clutch at these straws from yrs past to get a guilty verdict. Adrianno DeSouza, well enough said really. He doesn't have a great history and his English wasn't that great either; not a credible witness imo. AJ, highly prejudicial, you may say, as a Prosecutor should be, but no a Prosecutor is not allowed to prejudice the jury in such a way as he did and this is a point that should have been addressed at his opening speech particularly. DO - enough said, really there and on and on and on...The scientific evidence was the strongest part! His jacket proved he was right there in front of her, extremely close, with his arm even closer. That was more than enough there to convict. The witness was entirely credible, saying the same thing on the 911 tape as he said later. That was insanely solid - forensics proving he did it, a witness with a confession right after it happened, PBAs showing this was a pattern of his - you just don't get better!

The defense could never explain any of it.

[warhorse46]

I wouldn't dwell on any possible parole hearing, because he will be free after appeal within the next 12 months imo.:thumbsup:




Your lack of knowledge of the California Judicial System is painfull obvious. Appeals do not happen within a year. Scott Peterson was convicted in 2005 & has yet to even have an appeal lawyer appointed to his case. The Appeals Courts are so backed up & they have the authority to pick & choose which cases they hear that cases that do get before them wait for years. It is a long time consuming process that will NOT happen within a year.

<<Trial errors are unintentionally made in a number of ways by attorneys, jurors and/or judges:

Evidence may have been used against the person but shouldn’t have
Evidence that might have helped the person was wrongly kept out of the trial
The wrong law might have been applied
An attorney may have made an inappropriate argument
The jury instructions may have confused the jurors
The sentence was not appropriate for the crime
A criminal appeal gives the convicted person a second chance to obtain justice. When an error is discovered, it could be overturned or overruled so that the court’s decision is reversed.

If the conviction is reversed, the convicted person may get his/her sentence reduced or get a new trial.

California Law
Under California law, a criminal appeal can be filed by a convicted individual or his/her lawyer within 60 days of the conviction. Usually, the individual will hire an appellate lawyer to file the appeal.

The entire process starts when a notice of appeal is filed in the court where a conviction or ruling occurred. After that, a copy of all the criminal trial papers and testimony are gathered and filed with the appropriate California Court of Appeals.

An Appeal Requires Expertise
The California criminal appeal process is a very specialized, complicated process that demands appellate expertise on the part of the attorney. It involves extensive research and written and oral arguments, and can often take a year or more.

The procedures are different from the trial court process and include the following steps:

After the notice of appeal is filed, the “record on appeal,” or transcripts, are prepared and filed by a court clerk and reporter.
An “appellant’s opening brief” is then prepared by the attorney, who has found the errors, researched relevant law and cases, and written a brief containing the “grounds for appeal;” the reasons why the decisions should be overruled.
A “respondent’s brief” is then filed by the prosecution, and a good appeal lawyer then files an “appellant’s reply brief” in response to the prosecutor’s arguments.
Three judges in the Court of Appeal then hear the “oral arguments” on both sides.
Months after the arguments, the court makes its decision or “opinion” on the case.
If an appeal loses in the California Court of Appeals, it may be taken to the California Supreme Court. But, these cases are rarely accepted (approximately 125 per year).
http://www.lacriminaldefenseattorney.com/Appeals.html >>

[Nic99]

Warhorse: There is nothing I am not aware of in your post, which is why I posted exactly as I did. I am not painfully unaware of the processes and am very aware of how it works, as I have researched this area over the past weeks. Thanks for clarifying my points.

[warhorse46]

Uhh, it hasn't been proven yet. There are plenty of grounds for appeal as I have tried to state on here before. They are solid grounds and all firm points for a successful appeal. Roll on - I can't wait. This is my opinion and don't believe it is unattainable (as we say over the pond).



<< (as we say over the pond)>>

No wonder you know nothing about the USA Judicial system & cling to this false belief. This may help you understand the USA appeals process. It applies to both civil & criminal appeals.
http://www.sgrlaw.com/resources/trust_the_leaders/leaders_issues/ttl3/863/

[Nic99]

<< (as we say over the pond)>>

No wonder you know nothing about the USA Judicial system & cling to this false belief. This may help you understand the USA appeals process. It applies to both civil & criminal appeals.
http://www.sgrlaw.com/resources/trust_the_leaders/leaders_issues/ttl3/863/

Access to the internet 'is' worldwide.

[warhorse46]

I have NEVER followed any other trial apart from this one and probably never will. I have my opinions about this case and yes they are strong opinions and different to yours, but I am not who you describe above and never will be.

Your reality is your opinion only and mine is mine. I believe PS is innocent of 2nd degree murder and should not be judged by events 30 yrs past. Crikey, that is ALL they had; the scientific evidence was never enough and they had to clutch at these straws from yrs past to get a guilty verdict. Adrianno DeSouza, well enough said really. He doesn't have a great history and his English wasn't that great either; not a credible witness imo. AJ, highly prejudicial, you may say, as a Prosecutor should be, but no a Prosecutor is not allowed to prejudice the jury in such a way as he did and this is a point that should have been addressed at his opening speech particularly. DO - enough said, really there and on and on and on...


Forensics were the strongest part of the case, the PBAs were only there to show a pattern of very similar behavior. The PBA evidence was simply a support to the stronger real evidence of blood spatter that proved PS was within a foot or two of Lana & his arm was even closer. Simple physics comes into play here too. And yes a Prosecutor SHOULD try to prejudice a jury to his theory just as a good defense attorney should too. That is their job! If either defense team had felt AJ was overly prejudicing the jury then it is THEIR job to stand up & object, which neither did. Unless it is objected too by the other side @ the time it happens it CANNOT be used as an appeal point. More of you lack of USA Judical System knowledge coming to light here.

[warhorse46]

Warhorse: There is nothing I am not aware of in your post, which is why I posted exactly as I did. I am not painfully unaware of the processes and am very aware of how it works, as I have researched this area over the past weeks. Thanks for clarifying my points.


I clarified none of your points, in fact shot them all down in flames.

[tartangirl]

Just saw this...Hmmm New digs for Phil. :scared:


~ as always, Justice for Lana and those who love her~ At Last ~


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



http://www.mercurynews.com/breakingnews/ci_12672322?nclick_check=1

[Nic99]

Forensics were the strongest part of the case, the PBAs were only there to show a pattern of very similar behavior. The PBA evidence was simply a support to the stronger real evidence of blood spatter that proved PS was within a foot or two of Lana & his arm was even closer. Simple physics comes into play here too. And yes a Prosecutor SHOULD try to prejudice a jury to his theory just as a good defense attorney should too. That is their job! If either defense team had felt AJ was overly prejudicing the jury then it is THEIR job to stand up & object, which neither did. Unless it is objected too by the other side @ the time it happens it CANNOT be used as an appeal point. More of you lack of USA Judical System knowledge coming to light here.

AJ's opening argument has been a point of contention on 11/3/08. So what if PS was found to be near Lana, it does not mean he pulled the trigger. Overly prejudicing the jury is a point for appeal and just one of my points, see the link below for clarification:

http://lascftp.lasuperiorcourt.org/hp/yktt1ialihzwf42l4zmdav55/1301099148.pdf

[True2Blues]

If he survives that long, he could be in there for longer than 19 years. That's just when he becomes eligible for a parole hearing... His first... No guarantees he'd be paroled at his first hearing. Especially if he continues to deny what he did.

Beth Karas did say that parole never gets granted the first time in California. She used the word "Never", and I trust her.

You're right about no acceptance of responsibility. That is going to close the parole option off for him. That's a biggie. Accept you did something wrong, admit it, have remorse for it. I don't see PS doing any of the three, ever.

[True2Blues]

Just saw this...Hmmm New digs for Phil. :scared:


~ as always, Justice for Lana and those who love her~ At Last ~


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



http://www.mercurynews.com/breakingnews/ci_12672322?nclick_check=1

Off to Corcoran, Welcome Home Phil!

[vonna]

Warhorse: There is nothing I am not aware of in your post, which is why I posted exactly as I did. I am not painfully unaware of the processes and am very aware of how it works, as I have researched this area over the past weeks. Thanks for clarifying my points.

If you comprehend what has been written in detail about the appeal process how can you make such frivolous statements as you do about how soon Spector will be out of jail? I don't get it.

[Anakerie]

Just saw this...Hmmm New digs for Phil. :scared:


~ as always, Justice for Lana and those who love her~ At Last ~


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



http://www.mercurynews.com/breakingnews/ci_12672322?nclick_check=1
From the link on the Mercury News site:
A spokeswoman for the California Department of Corrections said Spector was taken Monday to the California Substance Abuse Treatment Facility and State Prison at Corcoran, where 6,919 other inmates are housed.
Spokeswoman Terry Thornton said Spector was assigned to the "sensitive needs facility."
Spector's notoriety probably got him into that housing area, Lt. Stephen Smith said. The typical inmate in the section is a former gang member who has dropped out of a gang and needs protection, Smith said

Wow.. I didn't expect they'd send him to Corcoran.. It certainly wasn't a long move.. I don't think Corcoran is terribly far from Kern State Prison. I wonder if Rachelle is still planning on moving nearby so she can visit as often as she said in her interviews...

I guess we'll be seeing a new mug shot of him soon... If I remember correctly each time a prisoner is moved from one prison to another they take a new picture...

[Details]

Does that mean he's being treated for substance abuse? Or is that just part of what the prison does? The name suggests it's a substance abuse center for prisoners - but it could also be that it's substance abuse and prison both - not sure which.

[hiitsme]

Does that mean he's being treated for substance abuse? Or is that just part of what the prison does? The name suggests it's a substance abuse center for prisoners - but it could also be that it's substance abuse and prison both - not sure which.

Interesting! "Sensitive Needs Facility" could perhaps be a combination of health and security issues. However, I doubt he will retain his title of "head honcho" in his new home. Some of his gang member roomies may not take too kindly to a man who murdered an innocent woman, especially if they have no clue as to who he is.

[kennedy06]

From the link on the Mercury News site:
A spokeswoman for the California Department of Corrections said Spector was taken Monday to the California Substance Abuse Treatment Facility and State Prison at Corcoran, where 6,919 other inmates are housed.
Spokeswoman Terry Thornton said Spector was assigned to the "sensitive needs facility."
Spector's notoriety probably got him into that housing area, Lt. Stephen Smith said. The typical inmate in the section is a former gang member who has dropped out of a gang and needs protection, Smith said

Wow.. I didn't expect they'd send him to Corcoran.. It certainly wasn't a long move.. I don't think Corcoran is terribly far from Kern State Prison. I wonder if Rachelle is still planning on moving nearby so she can visit as often as she said in her interviews...

I guess we'll be seeing a new mug shot of him soon... If I remember correctly each time a prisoner is moved from one prison to another they take a new picture...

Thanks to Tartangirl for the link and especially you Anakerie, lol I couldn't get the link to work for me so now I know Corcoran. Wow, so it is the place linked to so many times before during the trials, concerning that special housing unit. I wonder if there is anything on utube will have to look for the sensitive needs unit or Lockup.

If it says anything else, please let those of us know that can't get the link to come up.

Thank You:smile:

[Details]

Interesting! "Sensitive Needs Facility" could perhaps be a combination of health and security issues. However, I doubt he will retain his title of "head honcho" in his new home. Some of his gang member roomies may not take too kindly to a man who murdered an innocent woman, especially if they have no clue as to who he is.I'm sure he never had such a title to begin with - there is no Head Honcho in prison other than the warden. Prisoners don't get to form their own new social order, let alone one respected by guards. You're one of many murderers - best title you can get is trustee if you become considered trustworthy.


Kennedy - you can probably get the link to work - just takes some work. Right-click on it, select "Copy Link" - go to your address bar, paste it in, then remove everything after the question mark - that seems to be messing it up. That worked for me - and a good technique to use generally for links that fail - copy them, then you can see if you see anything that looks odd.

[Anakerie]

Thanks to Tartangirl for the link and especially you Anakerie, lol I couldn't get the link to work for me so now I know Corcoran. Wow, so it is the place linked to so many times before during the trials, concerning that special housing unit. I wonder if there is anything on utube will have to look for the sensitive needs unit or Lockup.

If it says anything else, please let those of us know that can't get the link to come up.

Thank You:smile:
I haven't looked on youtube yet, but google videos has some:
Google Videos: Corcoran (http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=California%20Substance%20Abuse%20Tre atment%20Facility%20and%20State%20Prison%20at%20Co rcoran&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&hl=en&tab=wv#)

ETA: It just dawned on me... Phil is going to have Charles Manson as a "neighbor"!

[hiitsme]

I'm sure he never had such a title to begin with - there is no Head Honcho in prison other than the warden. Prisoners don't get to form their own new social order, let alone one respected by guards. You're one of many murderers - best title you can get is trustee if you become considered trustworthy.


Kennedy - you can probably get the link to work - just takes some work. Right-click on it, select "Copy Link" - go to your address bar, paste it in, then remove everything after the question mark - that seems to be messing it up. That worked for me - and a good technique to use generally for links that fail - copy them, then you can see if you see anything that looks odd.

I was being a bit facetious with the "head honcho" comment. One of PS's visitors apparently used the term to describe his adjustment to prison life at the first facility. Thankfully, I don't know much about prison life but concluded it to be ridiculous and untrue.

[My 2 Cents]

Just saw this...Hmmm New digs for Phil. :scared:


~ as always, Justice for Lana and those who love her~ At Last ~


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



http://www.mercurynews.com/breakingnews/ci_12672322?nclick_check=1

THANKS TARTANGIRL for the surprise update on Spector's move.

Isn't Corcoran State Prison the location that both Sirhan-Sirhan AND Charles Manson are now both imprisoned at? I thought Manson had been moved there.

If Rachelle is true to her word and plans on visiting Spector regularly (Fri, Sat and Sun), I guess she'll be moving to Fresno or Hanford or ?, not really sure what large towns are nearby. Oh course that might make her recording career a little more difficult to pursue - living in Hanford or Fresno. :wink:

[Details]

I was being a bit facetious with the "head honcho" comment. One of PS's visitors apparently used the term to describe his adjustment to prison life at the first facility. Thankfully, I don't know much about prison life but concluded it to be ridiculous and untrue.I knew you were facetious (oh, so that's how that word is spelled - why isn't it pronounced that way :rolleyes: English! :cursing:) - but I know there are others here who buy into that - so I replied for them far more than you. :smile:

[kellabeck]

I wouldn't dwell on any possible parole hearing, because he will be free after appeal within the next 12 months imo.:thumbsup:

:laugh:
ROFLMAO!!

[Anakerie]

Oh my... Harriet Ryan says that Phil will be able to have "jam sessions" with the other inmates in the unit he's been assigned to.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/06/even-in-prison-phil-spector-will-be-allowed-jam-sessions-with-fellow-prisoners.html

Rachelle is happy that he's at Corcoran too. Spector’s wife, Rachelle, welcomed the transfer and said it would be an improvement from the Kern County prison where, she said, she was unable to visit her husband or speak to him by phone. “Anywhere is better than that place,” she said.
I wonder if the problem with her talking to Phil on the phone was that he didn't call her. After all, people can't just call a prison and ask for so-and-so, and the prisoners certainly don't have phones in their cells. I have no clue why she couldn't visit him. Maybe she didn't go up to Kern on the right day?

[True2Blues]

Does that mean he's being treated for substance abuse? Or is that just part of what the prison does? The name suggests it's a substance abuse center for prisoners - but it could also be that it's substance abuse and prison both - not sure which.

It's interesting that they pointed out that he'll be in a facility with a substance abuse facility, but didn't say if he'd be in the program.

Corcoran is a real prison, but it seems PS will be in the segregation area where former gang members, former aryan nation members, people who need protection from other prisoners, like child molesters, are kept. I've seen it on documentaries, it may have a different name, but it's still a bleak, noisy place where the lights never get turned off.

[True2Blues]

Oh my... Harriet Ryan says that Phil will be able to have "jam sessions" with the other inmates in the unit he's been assigned to.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/06/even-in-prison-phil-spector-will-be-allowed-jam-sessions-with-fellow-prisoners.html

Rachelle is happy that he's at Corcoran too. Spector’s wife, Rachelle, welcomed the transfer and said it would be an improvement from the Kern County prison where, she said, she was unable to visit her husband or speak to him by phone. “Anywhere is better than that place,” she said.
I wonder if the problem with her talking to Phil on the phone was that he didn't call her. After all, people can't just call a prison and ask for so-and-so, and the prisoners certainly don't have phones in their cells. I have no clue why she couldn't visit him. Maybe she didn't go up to Kern on the right day?


Well, he can just croon the day away.

What are pre cancerous tumors? They obviously aren't cancerous now and even though they may be a type that are sometimes cancerous, there's no guarantee they will become so. She can't just say throat polyps? She certainly seems to want to exaggerate his health issues, which are almost non existent for a man his age if all he has is polyps and shaking (that, again, maybe Parkinsons or may not be). If that's meant to garner sympathy, it isn't working.

[dref99]

THANKS TARTANGIRL for the surprise update on Spector's move.

Isn't Corcoran State Prison the location that both Sirhan-Sirhan AND Charles Manson are now both imprisoned at? I thought Manson had been moved there.

If Rachelle is true to her word and plans on visiting Spector regularly (Fri, Sat and Sun), I guess she'll be moving to Fresno or Hanford or ?, not really sure what large towns are nearby. Oh course that might make her recording career a little more difficult to pursue - living in Hanford or Fresno. :wink:

http://www.mercurynews.com/breakingnews/ci_12672322

Includes a few comments from Rachelle. I hope her comments do get investigated - does she understand the difference between truth and fiction or does she just not understand who is now in charge of the welfare of her husband?


Edit - Just saw your post Anakerie

Spector’s wife, Rachelle, welcomed the transfer and said it would be an improvement from the Kern County prison where, she said, she was unable to visit her husband or speak to him by phone. “Anywhere is better than that place,” she said.

How would she know what she told LD (reported in the mercury) if she hadn't visited or spoken to Phil? One confusing lady

jmo

[vonna]

http://www.mercurynews.com/breakingnews/ci_12672322

Includes a few comments from Rachelle. I hope her comments do get investigated - does she understand the difference between truth and fiction or does she just not understand who is now in charge of the welfare of her husband?


Edit - Just saw your post Anakerie

Spector’s wife, Rachelle, welcomed the transfer and said it would be an improvement from the Kern County prison where, she said, she was unable to visit her husband or speak to him by phone. “Anywhere is better than that place,” she said.

How would she know what she told LD (reported in the mercury) if she hadn't visited or spoken to Phil? One confusing lady

jmo

She just makes it up as she goes along.

[dref99]

She just makes it up as she goes along.

:biggrin: It would seem that way - I did reread the article and discovered he communicated by letter. I would also be seriously doubtful that a wife would not be allowed to visit or speak to a prisoner for a month - does this really happen? - or is it like other places where calls are recorded perhaps?

I know nothing about the prison system/s and am very thankful that I have no need to know - at the current point in time - hopefully always.

jmo

[bearwds]

Stumbled on a new T/T entry written about 15 minutes ago.


bearwds

[warhorse46]

AJ's opening argument has been a point of contention on 11/3/08. So what if PS was found to be near Lana, it does not mean he pulled the trigger. Overly prejudicing the jury is a point for appeal and just one of my points, see the link below for clarification:

http://lascftp.lasuperiorcourt.org/hp/yktt1ialihzwf42l4zmdav55/1301099148.pdf


Your link is irrelevant, it is simply a motion written by defense attorneys & submitted to the appeal court. You do realize that thousands upon thousands of motions are submitted but only a very few are found to have enough merit to actually be heard by said court. The vast majority are rejected. Did you bother to read the links I provided on exactly how appeals are done in the US?
The blood spatter pattern shows who had the gun in their hand when it was discharged--Phil Spector.

[vonna]

Your link is irrelevant, it is simply a motion written by defense attorneys & submitted to the appeal court. You do realize that thousands upon thousands of motions are submitted but only a very few are found to have enough merit to actually be heard by said court. The vast majority are rejected. Did you bother to read the links I provided on exactly how appeals are done in the US?
The blood spatter pattern shows who had the gun in their hand when it was discharged--Phil Spector.

Good for you bursting another bubble!

[warhorse46]

Here is a link to Corcoran State Prison.

http://www.cdcr.ca.gov/Visitors/Facilities/COR.html

[Anakerie]

AJ's opening argument has been a point of contention on 11/3/08. So what if PS was found to be near Lana, it does not mean he pulled the trigger. Overly prejudicing the jury is a point for appeal and just one of my points, see the link below for clarification:

http://lascftp.lasuperiorcourt.org/hp/yktt1ialihzwf42l4zmdav55/1301099148.pdf
Are you aware that the motion you linked is dated from last November? And that it had already been denied?

[My 2 Cents]

http://www.mercurynews.com/breakingnews/ci_12672322

Includes a few comments from Rachelle. I hope her comments do get investigated - does she understand the difference between truth and fiction or does she just not understand who is now in charge of the welfare of her husband?


Edit - Just saw your post Anakerie

Spector’s wife, Rachelle, welcomed the transfer and said it would be an improvement from the Kern County prison where, she said, she was unable to visit her husband or speak to him by phone. “Anywhere is better than that place,” she said.

How would she know what she told LD (reported in the mercury) if she hadn't visited or spoken to Phil? One confusing lady

jmo


I don't know - but POSSIBLY Rachelle gets information about what's happening from Phil's lawyer. Since they can't deny him the right to speak with his lawyers, perhaps she gets feedback from them. However, I doubt Phil has received any visits at Kern from Weinberg.

RE: The statement, "Spector hoping to get a TELEVISION, an IPOD and perhaps COMPUTER ACCESS . . . or at least receive e-Mail".

GIVE ME A BREAK . . . . DO INMATES IN PRISON, DOING TIME FOR MURDER REALLY GET THESE LUXURIES??? I thought they get 3 meals a day, medical assistance when needed and a bed, cell and some exercise for 1/2 hour or so a day. THAT's IT!!! WHY SHOULD SOMEONE CONVICTED OF MURDER BE ALLOWED THIS? AM I BEING UNREASONABLE TO THINK THIS WAY? . . . UNBELIEVABLE IMO.

RE: Rachelle's letter from Phil stating that he was, "forced to sleep naked on the floor for two nights and had to eat out of a bowl with his hands like a dog."

I equate the reliability of that statement with some of Phil's other claims, such as; "Lana committed suicide". (Of course I understand these things do happen in prisons, but I still don't put much credence in it coming from Phil, via Rachelle no less.)

[Details]

Are you aware that the motion you linked is dated from last November? And that it had already been denied?So - obviously not a point for appeal.

[Anakerie]

I don't know - but POSSIBLY Rachelle gets information about what's happening from Phil's lawyer. Since they can't deny him the right to speak with his lawyers, perhaps she gets feedback from them. However, I doubt Phil has received any visits at Kern from Weinberg.

RE: The statement, "Spector hoping to get a TELEVISION, an IPOD and perhaps COMPUTER ACCESS . . . or at least receive e-Mail".

GIVE ME A BREAK . . . . DO INMATES IN PRISON, DOING TIME FOR MURDER REALLY GET THESE LUXURIES??? I thought they get 3 meals a day, medical assistance when needed and a bed, cell and some exercise for 1/2 hour or so a day. THAT's IT!!! WHY SHOULD SOMEONE CONVICTED OF MURDER BE ALLOWED THIS? AM I BEING UNREASONABLE TO THINK THIS WAY? . . . UNBELIEVABLE IMO.

RE: Rachelle's letter from Phil stating that he was, "forced to sleep naked on the floor for two nights and had to eat out of a bowl with his hands like a dog."

I equate the reliability of that statement with some of Phil's other claims, such as; "Lana committed suicide". (Of course I understand these things do happen in prisons, but I still don't put much credence in it coming from Phil, via Rachelle no less.)

Re: your sentence that I turned red: Weinberg is a bit busy with his pedophile psychiatrist case (William Ayers) right now. Opening arguments are done (as of today, Tuesday) and the prosecution is calling witnesses. I seriously doubt that he would take the time to go down to either Kern or Corcoran to visit with Phil. Maybe Riordan will be the one who gets the pleasure of driving down to the central valley to visit Phil.

As for Phil's hopes for entertainment, I believe he'll be able to get a TV at some point. It'll be a small model with a transparent case. Probably not a HD TV.. Awww... As far as the iPod and computer access, he shouldn't hold his breath. It's not going to happen. I'm pretty sure I read somewhere on the California Corrections website that iPods aren't allowed, and we've already researched the computer access thing and came up with a huge negative answer. So, no iPod, no computer and it won't be a TV like Phil had at home when he does manage to get one.

[Anakerie]

RE: Rachelle's letter from Phil stating that he was, "forced to sleep naked on the floor for two nights and had to eat out of a bowl with his hands like a dog."

I equate the reliability of that statement with some of Phil's other claims, such as; "Lana committed suicide". (Of course I understand these things do happen in prisons, but I still don't put much credence in it coming from Phil, via Rachelle no less.)

I agree with you here... I doubt very seriously that Phil was made to sleep naked on the floor for two nights.. It's a ridiculous idea. If the corrections system were forcing prisoners to do such a thing, I am sure we'd have heard about a few lawsuits here and there about the "inhumane treatment"... And if he ate out of a bowl with his hands, maybe it's because he chose to do that... Doh... They do have utensils in prison.. I've seen them on the Lockup shows.. lol

At this point I wouldn't believe anything Rachelle is saying about her husband's treatment in prison... Or anything else for that matter.

[Explorer]

this cached article from May said he "reviewed" material related to the case "at the request of the police".

http://74.125.47.132/search?q=cache:s7luH_2uMbEJ:www.bnd.com/news/crime/story/778619.html+baden+coleman&cd=7&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

eta link

Thanks for that. Baden has a long career. I dont think anyone can trust him after Phil Spector.

[Themis]

This is what I'm wondering. If they dont trust Baden. He seems to have lost credibility.
Most people who watched Dr. Michael Baden's testimony during the Phil Spector trial #1 lost all respect for him -- both as a doctor and as an honorable person. I no longer trust anything that man says.

When assistant district attorney Alan Jackson cross examined him Baden was shown to be at the very least disingenuous, and many trial watchers think of him now as a liar due to his last minute *Aha* moment. It was truly laughable.

Spector's 2nd trial defense attorney, Dorion Weinberg, did not use Baden as an 'expert.' [JMO * Themis]

[vonna]

[QUOTE=My 2 Cents;13220056]visits at Kern from Weinberg.

Snipped....


I equate the reliability of that statement with some of Phil's other claims, such as; "Lana committed suicide".



Thanks for putting this into perspective for us.

[CelticDawn]

Thanks for that. Baden has a long career. I dont think anyone can trust him after Phil Spector.

HOW MANY professionals ruined their reputations because of PHIL SPECTOR??????

[Themis]

With regard to what a California prisoner can and cannot have, here is a link to one of the approved vendors with its list:

http://californiainmatepackage.com/Catalog/MenuCatalogPages/ManageStaticPage.aspx?pageid=ProductRestriction

If the above link does not work correctly, try this one:

http://californiainmatepackage.com/home.aspx

Then you can click on 'Product Info & Restrictions' and other sections.

During the reception-evaluation phase I don't believe a prisoner can receive any packages. At least that is the way it used to be. Perhaps rules have been relaxed.

Recent articles stated that it could take up to 6 months for Spector's evaluation process to be completed. He might stay at North Kern State Prison in Delano or he might be moved elsewhere. [JMO * Themis]

[hiitsme]

Exactly. Rachelle and Phil are two peas in a pod; most dishonest. imo

It just amazes me that not one person in Rachelle's circle of acquaintances has been able to convince her that her childish antics and lack of class in dealing with her husband's situation is inappropriate and does nothing to help. The more she carries on, the more I think of the dignity and strength of the Clarksons to grieve in private and patiently await the Civil trial.

[dref99]

It just amazes me that not one person in Rachelle's circle of acquaintances has been able to convince her that her childish antics and lack of class in dealing with her husband's situation is inappropriate and does nothing to help. The more she carries on, the more I think of the dignity and strength of the Clarksons to grieve in private and patiently await the Civil trial.

Classy folks indeed are the Clarkson family - less said about Rachelle the better.

jmo

[Carol25]

Harriet Ryan of the Los Angles Times has reported that Phil Spector, convicted killer of Lana Jean Clarkson has been moved to the prison in Corcoran. It is a medium security, special needs unit.

LL
Wonder what his special need is, psychiatric? And they wanted to do a psych profile on Lana during the trial! Maybe they will keep him in a rubber room.

[warhorse46]

Good for you bursting another bubble!



I love shooting down flimsy theories with hard facts.

[warhorse46]

Are you aware that the motion you linked is dated from last November? And that it had already been denied?



Thanks for the info, I did not realize that motion had already been rejected.

[oodi]

Thanks warhorse46 for directing me here! I'll have to do some reading to catch up!

[warhorse46]

I don't know - but POSSIBLY Rachelle gets information about what's happening from Phil's lawyer. Since they can't deny him the right to speak with his lawyers, perhaps she gets feedback from them. However, I doubt Phil has received any visits at Kern from Weinberg.

RE: The statement, "Spector hoping to get a TELEVISION, an IPOD and perhaps COMPUTER ACCESS . . . or at least receive e-Mail".

GIVE ME A BREAK . . . . DO INMATES IN PRISON, DOING TIME FOR MURDER REALLY GET THESE LUXURIES??? I thought they get 3 meals a day, medical assistance when needed and a bed, cell and some exercise for 1/2 hour or so a day. THAT's IT!!! WHY SHOULD SOMEONE CONVICTED OF MURDER BE ALLOWED THIS? AM I BEING UNREASONABLE TO THINK THIS WAY? . . . UNBELIEVABLE IMO.

RE: Rachelle's letter from Phil stating that he was, "forced to sleep naked on the floor for two nights and had to eat out of a bowl with his hands like a dog."

I equate the reliability of that statement with some of Phil's other claims, such as; "Lana committed suicide". (Of course I understand these things do happen in prisons, but I still don't put much credence in it coming from Phil, via Rachelle no less.)

I feel the same way re the truthfullness of those statements. Neither PS nor Rachelle have a track record of being truthful. The last I knew inmates did not have access to the internet in anyway except through a third party. They could write letters to a third party who then could post those letters to an internet site. I doubt they are allowed IPods either but could be wrong on that one. Too much of a temptation for other inmates to assault the IPod owner & take it from him. In most prisons inmates are allowed to purchase a 13 inch TV to place in their cell but they do not have cable access. They must buy it with their own money.

[warhorse46]

With regard to what a California prisoner can and cannot have, here is a link to one of the approved vendors with its list:

http://californiainmatepackage.com/Catalog/MenuCatalogPages/ManageStaticPage.aspx?pageid=ProductRestriction

If the above link does not work correctly, try this one:

http://californiainmatepackage.com/home.aspx

Then you can click on 'Product Info & Restrictions' and other sections.

During the reception-evaluation phase I don't believe a prisoner can receive any packages. At least that is the way it used to be. Perhaps rules have been relaxed.

Recent articles stated that it could take up to 6 months for Spector's evaluation process to be completed. He might stay at North Kern State Prison in Delano or he might be moved elsewhere. [JMO * Themis]


Very informative, thanks for the links.

[warhorse46]

Thanks warhorse46 for directing me here! I'll have to do some reading to catch up!


You're welcome. There are some very informative links provided in this thread.

[Ellie]

add no sleep, no decent food, no drugs whenever he feels like it, no alcohol, no women to abuse, no friends, constant state of fear and will die in prison;

did I leave anything out?

Guns, my friend. You left "no guns" off of your list. :smile:

[Themis]

According to a very small (4 paragraphs) article this morning, 6-24-09, in the Sacramento Bee newspaper:

Phil Spector is at the California Substance Abuse Treatment Facility and State Prison at Corcoran.

It is the largest prison in California and is south of Fresno.

Note: Now he can receive packages. He is allowed an AM-FM radio and a 13" TV. Both have clear plastic cases and must be purchased by special vendors approved by the CDCR.

[JMO * Themis]

[Deannalynn]

I wouldnt trust Baden as far as I could throw him. Well see time will tell whats going on.

Baden is become a liar for hire like a lot of them based on what he "threw" out there in the Phil Spector trial. His Infamous "AHA" moment left the jury and the people speechless.
In addition, IIRC, this over educated man could not sit there and simply define what "Conflict of Interest" meant. He was stuck between a rock and a hard spot and his credibility took a hard fast dive.
The more Alan Jackson questioned him, the more he became the weakest link. That my friends was the moment of truth in that trial.
If he has anything to do with this case directly, the State will be all over him. He must know that and LKB certainly does. Ya think they would actually do a repeat performance in this trial?
jmo

[warhorse46]

Guns, my friend. You left "no guns" off of your list. :smile:




Yes for sure! And those guns seemed to be what PS felt he needed to control those around him.

[Barbara fl.]

Baden is become a liar for hire like a lot of them based on what he "threw" out there in the Phil Spector trial. His Infamous "AHA" moment left the jury and the people speechless.
In addition, IIRC, this over educated man could not sit there and simply define what "Conflict of Interest" meant. He was stuck between a rock and a hard spot and his credibility took a hard fast dive.
The more Alan Jackson questioned him, the more he became the weakest link. That my friends was the moment of truth in that trial.
If he has anything to do with this case directly, the State will be all over him. He must know that and LKB certainly does. Ya think they would actually do a repeat performance in this trial?
jmo

You are so right.....I too doubt that Dr. Baden will have a roll in this trial...and Henry Lee is only going to make a bigger fool of himself....I doubt that Henry Lee will ever be able to make a comeback after the PS case...

But, I'm happy that Florida is taking precautionary steps just incase, to insure that Casey will not be allowed a bond in the event that a hung jury should arise....I believe that if Casey is found guilty of the check charges she will be held on those charges until a new triel for the murder charge.....

Thus insuring that Casey will, infact, never see the outside again...no matter what happens at the murder trial.....One thing is for certain, there is no way a jury of 12 will find her "not guilty" of murder....at the very least, if the defense really goes at it, they "MAY" be able to sway "one", weak link, causing a hung jury....JMO

[ellegna]

Baden is become a liar for hire like a lot of them based on what he "threw" out there in the Phil Spector trial. His Infamous "AHA" moment left the jury and the people speechless.
In addition, IIRC, this over educated man could not sit there and simply define what "Conflict of Interest" meant. He was stuck between a rock and a hard spot and his credibility took a hard fast dive.
The more Alan Jackson questioned him, the more he became the weakest link. That my friends was the moment of truth in that trial.
If he has anything to do with this case directly, the State will be all over him. He must know that and LKB certainly does. Ya think they would actually do a repeat performance in this trial?
jmo

Ah Yes. The AHA! Moment. I remember well

Judge scolds Spector defense
Baden conceded during his testimony that he had an "aha!" moment last Sunday and came up with the theory. Prosecutors said they did not learn of it until he testified and were unable to rebut it.
"When Dr. Baden testified as to the theory it was not just an 'aha!' moment for him, but for me," the judge said. "It was a major piece of evidence and a change of tactic."


http://www.usatoday.com/life/music/2007-08-16-2360251218_x.htm

Isn't it ironic that a good number of Spector's experts are now on Casey's defense team? Am I having a deja vu moment? :laugh:

[Daisy]

With regard to what a California prisoner can and cannot have, here is a link to one of the approved vendors with its list:

http://californiainmatepackage.com/Catalog/MenuCatalogPages/ManageStaticPage.aspx?pageid=ProductRestriction... .....



Thanks, that was really interesting. After reading the list, I have to ask... How freaking big are their prison cells?!?! :rolleyes:

~Daisy

PS
And after reading the remark that Rachelle Spector made that Phil had to eat his food with his hands, "like a dog"? (which I only believe if PS gave them a reason that he wouldn't be safe using eating utensils!) Well, my dog never ate with "his hands"!! **snicker**

[Explorer]

There is no bond for murder. It doesn't matter how many sympathetic people are out there. She will remain in jail until the retrial.

Your logic speaks more of vengence than what is proper. You already have her convicted of the murder charges. The court does not look at it the same way. In their eyes she is innocent until proven guilty. The law does not punish people until they are convicted. If there is a hung jury then she will receive the same consideration as every other defendant in her position. She will be an unconvicted defendant.

If there is some reason for the charges to go forward they will. But I suspect the court is more concerned with her ability to prepare for the capital case and receive a fair trial. If that means putting off the fraud charges that's the breaks. I don't, however, think this is any indication that she is receiving special treatment. This happens everyday.

JMO

But what about Spector didnt he get out until retrial?

[Themis]

Wednesday morning, 6-24, brief update in the Sacramento Bee newspaper:

Spector has a new cell (has been moved to) at the:

California Substance Abuse Treatment Facility at the Corocoran State Prison.
Corcoran is south of Fresno and houses 6,900 prisoners.

http://www.cdcr.ca.gov/Visitors/Facilities/COR.html

Themis

P.S. Weather Forecast for Fresno: Today = 99, Thursday = 95 ;-)

[Lapis]

But what about Spector didnt he get out until retrial?

He was tried for second degree murder and posted his bail. His case also took place in California where the bail rules may be different. Here the court has indicated there is no bail. JMO

[happygert]

But what about Spector didnt he get out until retrial?

He never spent 1 day in jail.. he didnt got to jail until after her was found guilty.. then straight to prison he went

[RootBeer]

Phil Spector will be allowed jam sessions with fellow prisoners

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/06/even-in-prison-phil-spector-will-be-allowed-jam-sessions-with-fellow-prisoners.html


I think this is a positive thing that Mr. Spector can do while serving the time he was given.

Make sure to read the comments below the article.

[Sandy001]

Ah Yes. The AHA! Moment. I remember well

Judge scolds Spector defense
Baden conceded during his testimony that he had an "aha!" moment last Sunday and came up with the theory. Prosecutors said they did not learn of it until he testified and were unable to rebut it.
"When Dr. Baden testified as to the theory it was not just an 'aha!' moment for him, but for me," the judge said. "It was a major piece of evidence and a change of tactic."




http://www.usatoday.com/life/music/2007-08-16-2360251218_x.htm
Isn't it ironic that a good number of Spector's experts are now on Casey's defense team? Am I having a deja vu moment? :laugh:
Hopefully they will do just as good a job as they did for Spectre and Casey will wind up where he is.

[hiitsme]

Thanks, that was really interesting. After reading the list, I have to ask... How freaking big are their prison cells?!?! :rolleyes:

~Daisy

PS
And after reading the remark that Rachelle Spector made that Phil had to eat his food with his hands, "like a dog"? (which I only believe if PS gave them a reason that he wouldn't be safe using eating utensils!) Well, my dog never ate with "his hands"!! **snicker**

Neither does mine! Maybe she meant squirrell. :laugh:

[warhorse46]

Wednesday morning, 6-24, brief update in the Sacramento Bee newspaper:

Spector has a new cell (has been moved to) at the:

California Substance Abuse Treatment Facility at the Corocoran State Prison.
Corcoran is south of Fresno and houses 6,900 prisoners.

http://www.cdcr.ca.gov/Visitors/Facilities/COR.html

Themis

P.S. Weather Forecast for Fresno: Today = 99, Thursday = 95 ;-)


With that kind of heat maybe PS slept naked on the floor for two nights by choice trying to cool off.

[vonna]

imo, She wouldn't know class if it hit her on her head. That lack of integrity won't bode well for her in the future either.

You said it best:

"The more she carries on, the more I think of the dignity and strength of the Clarksons to grieve in private and patiently await the Civil trial."

The Clarkson's have elevated "class" to new heights.