Phil Spector Debate and Discussion 2

[Spectorfan8]

I just got home from my grandmother's funeral, so I am a little behind, everyone go ahead and post about Mr. Spector.
have a good one!!

Spectorfan8

[juliekan]

I apologize if this has already been posted, since I am not a reg on this thread.

Just wanted to say I watched a documentary about the band the Ramones on Showtime last night and they had a segment on it with them talking about PS having them over to his house and not wanting them to leave and pointing guns at them...

[kennedy06]

Originally posted by juliekan [*]I apologize if this has already been posted, since I am not a reg on this thread.

Just wanted to say I watched a documentary about the band the Ramones on Showtime last night and they had a segment on it with them talking about PS having them over to his house and not wanting them to leave and pointing guns at them... [/*]

Thanks Julie for the information on the Ramone's documentary. One of them attended a party of PS's this year. There is a picture of him with PS on Trials & Tribulations the March 16 2008 post. Scroll down to about the bottom of the page. Just if you are a fan of the Ramone's and would like to see it . JMO

http://sprocket-trials.blogspot.com/...Phil%20Spector

Thanks Spectorfan for starting the new thread.

[GPSpector]

Hello All,

I was just reading Sprockets Blogs and looking at some of the pictures. Thanks Kennedy6 for the above link.

One of the things I never noticed and no one mentioned, was the differences in the guns in the 2 photos.

Here is the picture of my Father's gun:
http://bp0.blogger.com/_KKuG0mhN6fQ/...rtie+gun+1.jpg

Here's the picture of Mort's gun:
http://bp2.blogger.com/_KKuG0mhN6fQ/...rtie+gun+2.jpg

Other than the obvious that they are owned by 2 different people and have different handles, my Fathers gun has a shorter barrel.

I did not notice this at 1st until I noticed that the barrel was not cut parallel to the cylinder and than I noticed the sight (Nub Thingy above the Barrel) is shorter as is the Base Pin (doohickey thing right under the barrel )

Over all, the barrel was about 1/8" shorter on my father's gun. I will have to admit, I really had to adjust Mort's gun image to get it to match the best I could to be the same size in relation to my father's.

I noticed the Sight was almost the same size after all the adjusting but not quite. I used Corel 11 to turn Mort's gun partially transparent so that I could place his image right over my fathers gun and adjust for size since Mort's picture was a bit larger in size. I used the 3 screws for best alignment.

The biggest clue that my father's gun was modified was the end of the barrel compared to the end of, well any other gun.

[kennedy06]

I thought Mort's diagram (Hi Mort!) was nicely done and he handled the remarks of the commenter that had problems with his diagram quite well (a watermellon, okkk)

I see what you are saying GPSpector, it does look angled slightly I wonder if that is just the picture or something that occurs in the mfg process or it was modified. Good catch though!

If a gun like that would be modified slightly. would there be a particular reason for it, anyone??

The only thing I could find on the Colt in TDWS by M. Brown was it had been shipped from Colt to a Texas gun dealer in May of 1971 and there were no further records of owndership after that.

Hmmmm, JMO

[Spectorfan8]

Originally posted by Mort Snerd [*]

The gun titled " Mortie+gun+1.jpg" is a photograph taken by the press from the gallery in the court room and the screen with the image of the gun is at an angle of approx 30 degrees to the camera. I indicated this in the commentary in the article. As I am not a lawyer or on the prosecutors staff nor do I reside in California, I did not have or had access to Mr Spector's gun, only the press photograph. I did have access to a direct view at 90 degrees of an exact identical model and manufacturer of gun titled "Mortie+gun+2.jpg" that I clearly stated as a different gun. I also stated that I altered the photo to disguise the serial numbers only.

The reason the barrel looks shorter is the perspective caused by the angle between the screen and camera only. I did not retouch or alter the photograph in any way to make it look shorter. In the diagram, I used a Colt .38 shot from 90 degrees to eliminate any distortion caused by perspective distortion.

I have not attempted to confuse anyone, nor did I create false images to prove any point other than to state my opinion as to why blood spatter occured the way it appears to have been deposited. I stand by my opinion and images.

Mortie [/*]

Hi Mort!!

Thank you for clearing that up. I remember it the way you stated.

[GPSpector]

Originally posted by Mort Snerd [*]

The gun titled " Mortie+gun+1.jpg" is a photograph taken by the press from the gallery in the court room and the screen with the image of the gun is at an angle of approx 30 degrees to the camera. I indicated this in the commentary in the article. As I am not a lawyer or on the prosecutors staff nor do I reside in California, I did not have or had access to Mr Spector's gun, only the press photograph. I did have access to a direct view at 90 degrees of an exact identical model and manufacturer of gun titled "Mortie+gun+2.jpg" that I clearly stated as a different gun. I also stated that I altered the photo to disguise the serial numbers only.

The reason the barrel looks shorter is the perspective caused by the angle between the screen and camera only. I did not retouch or alter the photograph in any way to make it look shorter. In the diagram, I used a Colt .38 shot from 90 degrees to eliminate any distortion caused by perspective distortion.

I have not attempted to confuse anyone, nor did I create false images to prove any point other than to state my opinion as to why blood spatter occured the way it appears to have been deposited. I stand by my opinion and images.

Mortie [/*]

Sorry Mort, at no time was I criticizing your picture. My point was that my fathers gun barrel was shortened.

As for the tilt, the end of the barrel would still be Perpendicular to the top of the barrel as long as you move the camera up or down parallel to the gun. if you move the camera Left or Right, the end of the barrel will either look concave or convexed so what we see in the picture is not a camera angle issue, unless you can reproduce it with yours. But either way, I had no problem with your picture at all.

[kellygreen]

Judge Fidler will preside over PS-2. The California Supreme Court refused to take up Spector's claim that the judge was biased.

http://breakingnews.nypost.com/dynam...06-25-22-55-57

[GPSpector]

Originally posted by kellygreen [*]Judge Fidler will preside over PS-2. The California Supreme Court refused to take up Spector's claim that the judge was biased.

http://breakingnews.nypost.com/dynam...06-25-22-55-57 [/*]

Still never could understand why the Defense felt the Judge was unfair. Didn't the Judge allow him to "sleep" through most of it. How many Judges would have allowed that??

[GPSpector]

Originally posted by Mort Snerd [*]

I have too much respect for you and your posts to quibble over camera angles and view points, but I do not want to be viewed as a Dr. Spitz or DiMaio. It is a simple matter to move a camera off from top dead center and shoot at an angle to create a false sense of any objects size. I would like to point out that if you examine the cartridge sizes (the five on the left were S&W .38 SPL and the cartridge on the right was a Speer .38 Special) you can see that the cartridges appear smaller in height the further left you go. The actual size of a .38 SPL cartridge is 1.55" and all bullet manufactures keep to this toterance +/- .01"

The photo was the prosecutions first exhibit entered into evidence, therefore labeled "Item 1". I did not create the photograph nor was I in the courthouse to take the photo. If you take just the cartridges into Corel, then draw a straight line above and below the cartridge cases you will find a difference in size. The difference in size can then be used to calculate the foreshortening and also give you the angle which then can be used to determine the actual barrel length.

Mortie [/*]

Ok, so you are saying that the end of the barrel looks normal on my dads gun??

Just so you know, I would never compare you to those two. Like I said, your picture looked fine. I just tried to re-size it to try to make it the same scale as the other picture. I was not aware the 2 guns were not the same make and model. Thank you for clarifying that.

[True2Blues]

Originally posted by GPSpector [*]

Still never could understand why the Defense felt the Judge was unfair. Didn't the Judge allow him to "sleep" through most of it. How many Judges would have allowed that?? [/*]

They don't want a fair and competent Judge. That's why they want him gone. They want an Ito.

[True2Blues]

Originally posted by kellygreen [*]Judge Fidler will preside over PS-2. The California Supreme Court refused to take up Spector's claim that the judge was biased.

http://breakingnews.nypost.com/dynam...06-25-22-55-57 [/*]

Thank You! I've been wondering when they would get to that.

[tartangirl]

Always good to hear more postive news about this trial. The good judge will hold his own again in that courtroom and we and those involved in that case are the lucky ones...all except those at the defense table..probably not liking it so much right about now. Fair and Just you should be happy to have him PS2 team.

While watching trials this past year, I have seen some antics by defense lawyers that have truly taxed my patience. Often I find myself saying outloud..."where is Judge Fidler when you need him?"

Between Judge Fidler and the very good prosecution team in this case this courtroom will be under control. Love to see the process done the right way and with flourish...

[kennedy06]

Only because I posted on the subject and I noticed a very slight slant at the end of the barrel myself, sort of like this /_____ so that is just a distortion from the photo ok, I see, thanks Mort.

[Nova]

Originally posted by kellygreen [*]Judge Fidler will preside over PS-2. The California Supreme Court refused to take up Spector's claim that the judge was biased.

http://breakingnews.nypost.com/dynam...06-25-22-55-57 [/*]

Thanks for posting!!!!
Great to see JF will be presiding over PS2's trial ... I found him to be extremely FAIR to both sides. Can't wait to see AJ in action again!!!! I'll never forget him whispering those words "Don't Go" in his closing, great prosecutor. Of course, this is just my opinion.

[Jayne]

Originally posted by Nova [*]
Thanks for posting!!!!
Great to see JF will be presiding over PS2's trial ... I found him to be extremely FAIR to both sides. Can't wait to see AJ in action again!!!! I'll never forget him whispering those words "Don't Go" in his closing, great prosecutor. Of course, this is just my opinion.
[/*]

Yes..no reason for JF to "go"..he did nothing truly wrong...unless one wants to say he gave more leeway to the defense than the "normal" judge would. He watched his Ps and Qs and was 'aboveboard' all the way, IMO.

AJ in action. Wheewww..there are a lot of people here who either recognize his prosecutorial finesse...or the style of clothing and haircut and "youthfulness" about him! (kidding...yet, understanding at the same time...nothing like a handsome prosecutor (BTW...what happened to the 'beautiful/pretty' prosecutors??!! Guess they burn out earlier?!)) He had some wet behind the ears moments..and he's had years of experience. This was no quickie trial and he was "under the gun" many times. I think he did quite wonderfully. And, yeah, he's kinda fun to "look at" under camera.

"Don't Go"...YEP...great....theatrical, creative...and I think it was a good move on his part and obviously "hit" a few people...too bad it didn't hit all 12 in that BOX.

Yet..it's hindsight...I'm not putting a slab of concrete on that statement..I think it's great, frankly. "Don't believe everything you hear"..."Don't go"..."Don't be foolish"..."Don't put pearls before swine"...or whatever those sayings are.

"Don't Go"..good one. I thought it was, frankly, a Great statement in closing. Think she'd have listened? I don't think so...but it was a good one..to throw out there.

He did well, AJ, that is.

JMO

J

[tartangirl]

Hey Jayne, The good Judge Fidler and the remarkable prosecutors from PS1 were a true delight for all trial watchers. Smart men with good intentions always are. Working for Justice puts them in another dimension all together.

Well yes the prosecutors are human, thank the stars for that, and that means perfection usually does not occur here on earth.
This team was pretty darn close to that though.

While I will admit freely that watching Alan Jackson was a treat most days I was just listening, really listening to him. If I could be impressed via the television then most certainly he was able to reach the jurors. Pat Dixon held the attention of everyone that was lucky enough to be able to hear him speak. For me he is crafty and covert in his intensity and the results are most persuasive.

I have set my trial criteria by this one. By the work done by these three officers of the court. It is a mistake to do that I will admit because I am always a little disappointed by the lawyers and judges during the trials I observe.

Nice and good things can arrive in plain packages, that certainly is not the case with Judge Fidler, Alan Jackson or Pat Dixon. I am wowed by what is inside though and how they use their talents and gifts for the better of all of us.

waiting for the next trial..patiently..well, trying to.

take care ..as always

~Justice for Lana and those who love her~

[vonna]

Originally posted by tartangirl [*]

Hey Jayne, The good Judge Fidler and the remarkable prosecutors from PS1 were a true delight for all trial watchers. Smart men with good intentions always are. Working for Justice puts them in another dimension all together.

Well yes the prosecutors are human, thank the stars for that, and that means perfection usually does not occur here on earth.
This team was pretty darn close to that though.

While I will admit freely that watching Alan Jackson was a treat most days I was just listening, really listening to him. If I could be impressed via the television then most certainly he was able to reach the jurors. Pat Dixon held the attention of everyone that was lucky enough to be able to hear him speak. For me he is crafty and covert in his intensity and the results are most persuasive.

I have set my trial criteria by this one. By the work done by these three officers of the court. It is a mistake to do that I will admit because I am always a little disappointed by the lawyers and judges during the trials I observe.

Nice and good things can arrive in plain packages, that certainly is not the case with Judge Fidler, Alan Jackson or Pat Dixon. I am wowed by what is inside though and how they use their talents and gifts for the better of all of us.

waiting for the next trial..patiently..well, trying to.

take care ..as always

~Justice for Lana and those who love her~ [/*]

[Daisy'sMom]

Originally posted by Nova [*]
Thanks for posting!!!!
Great to see JF will be presiding over PS2's trial ... I found him to be extremely FAIR to both sides. Can't wait to see AJ in action again!!!! I'll never forget him whispering those words "Don't Go" in his closing, great prosecutor. Of course, this is just my opinion.
[/*]

Counting the days until the start of PS2! Watching JF at work made me proud and watching AJ, well, that was magic. I also remember those words, "don't go". I pray this time Lana will have justice.

[Jayne]

Originally posted by riverrambler [*]my favorite AJ moment was when - as he was questioning eyebrow dimaio who kept insinuating that lana committed suicide - AJ turns from the stand on his heel and says she must have wanted to kill herself because she was a hostess - in those words the utter absurdity of such an conclusion by the medical examiner was ludicrous and total disbelief apparent in AJs voice. after all the hours invested in the case it was apparent that this is what he knew. professional and yet sensitive - revealing quailities of the man as a prosecutor and human being. [/*]

Gosh..I don't remember that..and it was probably during one of the few days I couldn't "watch" TV when I was hospitalized, as I missed very little of it from start to finish (or hung jury - not "Finish"!). DiMaio..what a piece of work. Him and Spitz (am I getting the name correct?)

I agree that AJ is a great prosecutor...with amazing potential as he moves ahead and up. I really like Dixon, though too - and even though some posters felt he wasn't as dynamic or forceful as AJ, I thought his experience, calmness, gentleness (so to speak) and demeanor portrayed a seasoned prosecutor/attorney. He just has a different style. I can see why they had AJ in there alongside him, however. Baden I suppose was the comparable component of the defense? Maybe?

I want to comment on your last sentence. Prosecutors..or at least as I was taught...you Do bring in the "human part" of it and if you can do it like AJ and many other prosecutors..you aren't just a "piece of machinery" put up to represent the state, you are a sensitive individual who applies the law but realizes that the state is really "the people"..which should humanize it all. It's not just an "entity" that is "suing" the defendant for the crime committed...it's the entire population that comprises the State. Meaning..in my simple mind way of explaining it: Do NOT do this to a citizen of our state..s/he was one of us. And, we will Not Tolerate It. You have to take the Entity and turn it into a Human Being(s). We will not allow this. Essentially "The People of the State of California vs. Phil Spector". The people of the state are prosecuting Spector because they killed One Of Theirs/Them...because poor Lana can't do it. The state represents Lana (in a real sense, although Not Legally per the books)...a citizen of the state..one of the populace up to the moment of her demise. Thank goodness..I say...for having a system that can seek justice..even though many times it doesn't "work" out to true justice.

Hence..the admonition...Do not take the law into your own hands.

Good or Bad? Follow the law and take the consequences..or don't follow it and take the consequences.

Its a double edged sword. I so much feel for families who have felt so abandoned by the legal system and either do or want to take care of it themselves. Cowboy Law. Good? Bad? Obviously against the law. But, I do understand why people do take things into their own hands.

I hope for peace and resolution for the Clarkson family. And, I hope for peace and resolution for Spector's sons. And, in all fairness..I hope for resolution to PS..whatever that may be, whether I agree with it or not.JMO

J

Im glad judge Fidler will be the judge how about
alan Jackson i hope he is prosecuting the case he is the only one i think capable of prosecuting as well as he did the first time. in my opinion i think juror # 10 was paid off by the defense team. Phil desrves to go to prision for life for killing that woman.
karen

Hello all, Glad to hear judge Fidler will continue on . To me, he is a very fair minded man, and allows no disrespect in his court. something truely needed for this case!

[Spectorfan8]

Hi Everyone,

I am back from my grandmother's funeral and visiting the family.

As for Judge Fidler, it really doesn't bother me that he will be the judge. He presides over the court, makes sure everything goes as it should. IMO, he did that.
It is the jury that makes the final decision. Again, IMO, this new jury could be another hung jury. JMO

[kennedy06]

Since we are familiar with the faces of many of the main participants in this trial such as JF, AJ, Mr. Dixon and Plrd I came across a picture with PS new attorney in it. It gives us some idea of who we will be watching in the next trial. JMO

http://starbulletin.com/2002/11/20/news/story1.html

[tartangirl]

Originally posted by kennedy06 [*]Since we are familiar with the faces of many of the main participants in this trial such as JF, AJ, Mr. Dixon and Plrd I came across a picture with PS new attorney in it. It gives us some idea of who we will be watching in the next trial. JMO

http://starbulletin.com/2002/11/20/news/story1.html [/*]

Thanks for this...the last picture that I saw, and please do not ask me where, he was wearing a bow-tie. For some reason he looked very eclectic in that picture I saw and he really seemed to fit into the family...the Spector family of fans and advocates that is.

We shall see, it will be interesting and I feel so strongly that Justice will be served this time around..

take care, and as always..

JUSTICE FOR LANA AND THOSE WHO LOVE HER

[Jayne]

Originally posted by tartangirl [*]Thanks for this...the last picture that I saw, and please do not ask me where, he was wearing a bow-tie. For some reason he looked very eclectic in that picture I saw and he really seemed to fit into the family...the Spector family of fans and advocates that is.

We shall see, it will be interesting and I feel so strongly that Justice will be served this time around..

take care, and as always..

JUSTICE FOR LANA AND THOSE WHO LOVE HER [/*]

Interjecting for no reason at all...I guess. But he sort of looks like a white-haired Shapiro. Weinberg oughta watch out or he'll be sued too.

Sprocket has the history on him and I haven't kept on it...but who HAS he not sued, who has been his "protector"? Lawyers, Blaine, competitors in the music industry? (if not suing them at least pointing guns at them or threatening them or taking away their monetary "rights"?)...even in his own defense here, he's essentially suing the deceased Lana Clarkson..to make him look "BIG". Poor Chelle...after all this is over..if it's ever over..he'll be suing her, think? OR vice versa?

So..if Weinberg couldn't "get off" this fraud bigshot...what is his track record for pathological liars?

I wonder if Linda Baden sleeps well at night, wondering when she might receive her summons?

Maybe the "publicity" was worth it considering he might "leave her alone"?


MOO

J

[GPSpector]

Originally posted by kennedy06 [*]Since we are familiar with the faces of many of the main participants in this trial such as JF, AJ, Mr. Dixon and Plrd I came across a picture with PS new attorney in it. It gives us some idea of who we will be watching in the next trial. JMO

http://starbulletin.com/2002/11/20/news/story1.html [/*]

Ok, it would seem that my father is hoping to win this case by hiring a lawyer that just lost the Fraud case?? I just don't see that as a good thing

[kennedy06]

Originally posted by GPSpector [*]

Ok, it would seem that my father is hoping to win this case by hiring a lawyer that just lost the Fraud case?? I just don't see that as a good thing [/*]

Well in essence I guess you could say that! LOL

That picture was taken in 2002. The case went to appeal here is a link of the results.

http://www.khon2.com/news/business/7949597.html
---------

In the comments for the June 26 post on Trials & Tribulation concerning JF, there is a commenter that gives some idea also of his attorney's other past clients.

http://sprocket-trials.blogspot.com/

JMO

[kennedy06]

Originally posted by Jayne [*]

Interjecting for no reason at all...I guess. But he sort of looks like a white-haired Shapiro. Weinberg oughta watch out or he'll be sued too.

Sprocket has the history on him and I haven't kept on it...but who HAS he not sued, who has been his "protector"? Lawyers, Blaine, competitors in the music industry? (if not suing them at least pointing guns at them or threatening them or taking away their monetary "rights"?)...even in his own defense here, he's essentially suing the deceased Lana Clarkson..to make him look "BIG". Poor Chelle...after all this is over..if it's ever over..he'll be suing her, think? OR vice versa?

So..if Weinberg couldn't "get off" this fraud bigshot...what is his track record for pathological liars?

I wonder if Linda Baden sleeps well at night, wondering when she might receive her summons?

Maybe the "publicity" was worth it considering he might "leave her alone"?


MOO

J [/*]

Jayne I know what you are saying lol but, for some reason I don't think he will mess with LKB because of who her Husband is and his connection to the case.

[Jayne]

Originally posted by kennedy06 [*]

Jayne I know what you are saying lol but, for some reason I don't think he will mess with LKB because of who her Husband is and his connection to the case. [/*]

Oh, I agree...as to her husband's influence...but because she was his "hand holder". The male attorney's didn't do that...oh a hug here and there, as I recall.

I think you are spot on...he wouldn't and couldn't bit the hand that "feeds him"..as far as the prior testimony of LKB MISTER and then some.

Still...I do wonder...what she has as "dreams" from that trial.

Frankly, I think she did a stellar job..with what she was thrown. I didn't like her "attitude" or demeanor with the witnesses, but I totally understand it...sort of. I felt "embarrassed" for her (well, for me..as a female attorney) that she didn't get the Gun thing correct..or allowed the defense to put on such a sham of a demonstration. And from the beginning I lost almost every bit of "trust" in her as an investigative defense attorney when she talked about the bullet loading, etc. She HAD to know better...she had to...she has years of experience in the law. DNA on the bullets..and loading them Backwards? GMAB.

They had plenty of time to research and I bet a lot of Grunge Associates to do their work for them. There was no excuse for that..which is why I viewed it as 'malfeasance'..but PS would never claim that..it was to his benefit. Still..I give her the benefit of the doubt for being a good attorney. I think she got caught up in the whole scenario, especially with her husband as an "expert" (if you can call it/him that).

No..you're right..he wouldn't go after LKB...but she might still have trouble sleeping over the possibility, since Shapiro has a higher (not better, maybe) reputation that she does and he's been put through the coals by PS for standing by the "Man".

Liability..culpability...malpractice..misfeasance. .. What those lawyers have to go through..and then end up being retained by PS? It's a nightmare, IMO.

Besides the telephone man...I give a lot of credit to his attorneys...and I don't really blame them for a lot of things that went on in that trial Number One...except for a few things, which I won't mention here..but most posters here are cognizant of. You do what your client wants..as long as it is within the realm of applicable law and procedure..even if it's DAS.

Lawyer's are servants, in a sense.

I hope LKB doesn't have sleepless nights or nightmares over that trial. I don't think she deserves it. She did her best. I didn't "like" her as to how she presented evidence, but she was within the law. (I have a very few instances where I think she walked the line, but won't print it here.) The real perpetrator of the LKB family was her husband. IMO. He should have either not testified or she should have "backed out".

Honestly...and I know that Cutler looked pretty foolish out there...but he's a seasoned and smart attorney. I doubt he'd be taken on by PS this time..but he should have, imo. The prosecutors 'caught him'...which was pretty funny...Cutler knows better. But, in my simple mind here..I think he wanted "out"..and he did it "legally". Which says a lot. He's defended and Won many cases where defendants were POS. He wasn't going to keep up with this one.

I can hardly wait for September 29th...to start PS2. Phil is going to have his ducks, swans, and Brunhilde's in a row this time. From what I've read on Sprocket's blog and other areas...Weinberg is in for the YEAR...and he needs a
Good Win. Let's see.



MOO

J

I followed PS1 trial and I can only say I hope the prosecution is successful this time.

[Jayne]

Originally posted by ZumbaGirl [*]I followed PS1 trial and I can only say I hope the prosecution is successful this time. [/*]

I can't see that they wouldn't be successful. But...but...it's the jury that matters. And, you can't blame the lawyers if they did their jobs...from either side or both sides. Or I'd hope not..but PS would!

I think this time around...there will be a few changes..not much..from the prosecution side. But the defense...they have a huge ball of wax to melt down after the last trial. What a web was woven.

Weinberg better be all he thinks and they say he is...he has a long road ahead of him. Losing a labor union fraud case? GMAB! I understand why they lost..it wasn't him..it was the defendant.

So...here lies the new one..."lies" is the operative word, there. I would not want to walk in his shoes for one day..not in this PS2 trial. Regardless of his past record as to "win some, lost some", I'm giving him a lot of credit for coming in on this trial. I just want to see him be responsible, respectful, and professional.

I think he will be. I think for his past history with cases..and PS's past history..he's going to walk the fine line and do it well. It may well be a very interesting trial with a defense attorney who can handle it. Doesn't mean he's going to win for his client...but I think he's going to have his act together before he enters that courtroom on the 29th of September. He just might give the LA DAs a run for the time and money. THAT...I would like to see....that AJ and Dixon et al. win out..with a worthy opponent.

jmo

J

[kennedy06]

Originally posted by Jayne [*]

Oh, I agree...as to her husband's influence...but because she was his "hand holder". The male attorney's didn't do that...oh a hug here and there, as I recall.

I think you are spot on...he wouldn't and couldn't bit the hand that "feeds him"..as far as the prior testimony of LKB MISTER and then some.

Still...I do wonder...what she has as "dreams" from that trial.

Frankly, I think she did a stellar job..with what she was thrown. I didn't like her "attitude" or demeanor with the witnesses, but I totally understand it...sort of. I felt "embarrassed" for her (well, for me..as a female attorney) that she didn't get the Gun thing correct..or allowed the defense to put on such a sham of a demonstration. And from the beginning I lost almost every bit of "trust" in her as an investigative defense attorney when she talked about the bullet loading, etc. She HAD to know better...she had to...she has years of experience in the law. DNA on the bullets..and loading them Backwards? GMAB.

They had plenty of time to research and I bet a lot of Grunge Associates to do their work for them. There was no excuse for that..which is why I viewed it as 'malfeasance'..but PS would never claim that..it was to his benefit. Still..I give her the benefit of the doubt for being a good attorney. I think she got caught up in the whole scenario, especially with her husband as an "expert" (if you can call it/him that).

No..you're right..he wouldn't go after LKB...but she might still have trouble sleeping over the possibility, since Shapiro has a higher (not better, maybe) reputation that she does and he's been put through the coals by PS for standing by the "Man".

Liability..culpability...malpractice..misfeasance. .. What those lawyers have to go through..and then end up being retained by PS? It's a nightmare, IMO.

Besides the telephone man...I give a lot of credit to his attorneys...and I don't really blame them for a lot of things that went on in that trial Number One...except for a few things, which I won't mention here..but most posters here are cognizant of. You do what your client wants..as long as it is within the realm of applicable law and procedure..even if it's DAS.

Lawyer's are servants, in a sense.

I hope LKB doesn't have sleepless nights or nightmares over that trial. I don't think she deserves it. She did her best. I didn't "like" her as to how she presented evidence, but she was within the law. (I have a very few instances where I think she walked the line, but won't print it here.) The real perpetrator of the LKB family was her husband. IMO. He should have either not testified or she should have "backed out".

Honestly...and I know that Cutler looked pretty foolish out there...but he's a seasoned and smart attorney. I doubt he'd be taken on by PS this time..but he should have, imo. The prosecutors 'caught him'...which was pretty funny...Cutler knows better. But, in my simple mind here..I think he wanted "out"..and he did it "legally". Which says a lot. He's defended and Won many cases where defendants were POS. He wasn't going to keep up with this one.

I can hardly wait for September 29th...to start PS2. Phil is going to have his ducks, swans, and Brunhilde's in a row this time. From what I've read on Sprocket's blog and other areas...Weinberg is in for the YEAR...and he needs a
Good Win. Let's see.



MOO

J [/*]

It would be interesting to know not only about LKB but, how all the past defense attorneys are feeling now, concerning everything from the case to just personal dealings with PS.

In regards to Bruce C., Dominic Dunne writes abou thim in this Vanity Fair article. It gives a little insight as to what was going on with *. C. and the other members of the defense team. (Starting in the middle of page 2. Paragraph begining with Although I'm not one............ onto page 3.)

Vanity Fair Nov 2007 issue

http://www.vanityfair.com/fame/featu...?currentPage=2

Also in this earlier article it is mentioned that *. C. had rented a cottage at a Rtiz Carlton to be nearer the Castle. I wonder which attorney(s) were sleeping on those heavenly beds at the Westn and how they feel about the bill not being paid. *. C. is mentioned in this article by Dominic D. also

Vanity Fair Aug 2007

http://www.vanityfair.com/fame/featu...?currentPage=3


JMO

[tartangirl]

Kennedy06 thanks for the links to some of the best articles that were ever written about PS1. Always a favorite of mine, Dominic Dunne did a superb job sharing his diary with the loyal readers of Vanity Fair...although I would read him anywhere. My copies are all put aside awaiting re-reading before the second trial begins in Septermber.

I know that Bruce Cutler was a major part of the defense team in the beginning and that he made a bombastic attempt to discredit Diane Ogden, sadly now deceased, a strong PBA witness for his client. Somehow I have managed to put him in a seperate class than the others. It is comforting to know his kindness erupts through the rough exterior and he remains human.

I know that what these defense lawyers can do for a living does not always define them as human beings..it was often hard to find the human side of each one of them at the end of the trial day and often that impression just magnefied with each new witness. Almost a year later and the impression is still there..what oh what could that amount of money ever do to make up for the marks on their reputation?

Maybe we will all be treated to a book about this first defense team and the many additions and deletions of lawyers that so swifty speed past trial watchers. I would pay to read all that they would have to say, believe a third of it and enjoy the concept of that many members of the legal profession coming together and agreeing on anything. Especially that whole group of personalities..oh never mind that is just a whim, a fantasy or a better yet a dream.

Secrets made and secrets kept...human nature and client confidentiality will keep the rest of us guessing for a long time. Oh to have been a fly on the wall....good courtroom drama was a daily gift with the complete hope and feeling that the guilty verdict would be the only clear and obvious result of the fine work presented by the prosecution. Jury selection pulled out the doubtful card for PS1. With a strong hand given to them this time the prosecution will be able to seat a fair jury. One to the liking of both sides.

it will only get better and by that I first and formost hold Justice for Lana and those who love her to be the best ending.

JMHO~~take care

[tartangirl]

Originally posted by NavyMom58 [*]Great articles kennedy06! Hmmm. Maybe Mr Cutler is human after all. I guess the old saying is true, don't judge a book by it's cover.Still, his court personna is a little hard to watch without forming a negative opinion of him.

Hey TartanGirl, good morning! [/*]

Good morning to you NavyMom

Good to see you and looking forward to the next trial and posting with all of the other trial watchers from last year.

It will be exciting and a truly needed conclusion to this horrible event.

Justice for Lana and those who love her~

take care, tartangirl

Please forgive my ignorance-- but when is Spector 2 due to start. I was so addicted to the first trial, I can't believe I have to ask!!

[GPSpector]

Originally posted by jacona [*]Please forgive my ignorance-- but when is Spector 2 due to start. I was so addicted to the first trial, I can't believe I have to ask!! [/*]

The PS2 trial is due to start Sept 29, 2008

Thanks! My son is getting married on Sept. 20th. I'll be able to make it to the church on time!!

[Spectorfan8]

There is also a pre-trial hearing sometime in July. I'm not sure of the date.

[Jayne]

Originally posted by NavyMom58 [*]Great articles kennedy06! Hmmm. Maybe Mr Cutler is human after all. I guess the old saying is true, don't judge a book by it's cover.Still, his court personna is a little hard to watch without forming a negative opinion of him.

Hey TartanGirl, good morning! [/*]

Thanks for posting that kennedy. In the past (PS1), of the times I would post my knowledge or experience (very limited, mind you) of having been in the presence of Cutler or knowing his courtroom antics, representations, etc. (particularly from NYC), many, if not most, couldn't believe the man had a conscience or that 'human side'. I surmise that much of it came from the knowledge of the clientelle he represented and his bombastic, overpowering courtroom mannerisms.

He was "unkind" toward Ogden...and I think "over the top" even though it was within his "job" to "attack her". I even thought he should have gone about it a different way...it backslapped him, at the least. As said before - he should have known better. And maybe did...at the expense of a pretty innocent and "distraught" (over her relationship with PS) woman. Had all that not happened..plus his "alleged - as seen faux pas with the introduction of police documents being "withheld" knocking him for a loop in his planned opening statement (I can't believe he overlooked that or just "expected" it...but he was coming out of NY practice (for the most part)..yet, still no excuse for a lawyer with his years of experience). As many were as well, I was surprised by his Surprise. I wonder, however, if it just wasn't another of his courtroom antics on display at that point in the beginning of the trial. He held nothing back in being disappointed with the defense team. Then, again, I suppose he was used to be "top dog" and he just lost his tail to a very craft move on the part of the prosecution.

Despite that, I didn't view his "leaving" as him going out with his tail between his legs. He had better fish to fry - his personal obligations (well...that TV show) - and he was arrogant enough to say he didn't have to be there to be a defense attorney. Which..in a sense is true..if they were a true team, he would have been, more or less, of counsel to them. However, Fidler was correct in his decisions and rulings and so Cutler got to "walk". Whether it was a strategic move or not, I'm sure PS won't be filing suit against Cutler due to it or as a consequence to it. PS chose his team and kept those he wanted, including telephone man. By happenstance a few days ago, I came across the CA rules on telephone lawyering. Pretty interesting and I think a bit too "loose". But, that's just my opinion. My feeling? If you can't be there - then pass it on to someone who can. Can you imagine..in the future..being tried by telephone, internet, cams? There's just something about the physical presence of the one who is sort of holding your life in their hands...not just the mouthpiece of a telephone. (some others here, as well, compared telephone man to the Wizard of Oz!) Of course TM's wire conversations were about preserving appeal, the lesser included, instructions, etc. certainly not observing a witness, let alone questioning one. I could see direct examination of a witness, perhaps, by tele-something...but cross examination? Imagine if during PS1, we only got to "hear" the testimony..and not actually see it? Would be like reading transcripts...not like reading the directions to an on stage play where there are "parens" about the actor's physical directions, etc.

Pardon for the diverse comments here. And, it all started with a thanks for sharing Cutler's human side in print.

moo

J