More on Spector: the forensic argument from a real lawyer

I did not start this blog, in its earlier incarnation several years ago, to spend any attention on Phil Spector. Of course, I didn’t intend it to constantly rag on the Los Angeles Times either, and long-time readers will know how well that worked out.

In any event, things have changed since the Specor verdict came down last week. In my earlier post, I gave some personal reactions, and why in my mind I believe the jury decided wrongly. Since then, New York Post gossip columnist Cindy Adams recently spoke to New York Attorney Linda Baden, who had been a defense attorney at the first trial. Baden, whose husband is a renowned forensic pathologist, points out better than I could some of the evidence ignored by the jury:

“I went out to watch his closing. I saw him. We even spoke that day. He phoned just before re-entering the courtroom. He said: ‘There’s a verdict.’ I answered, ‘I know. I heard it on TV.’ I wished him luck and said I’d be there. He said, ‘Good.’

“At this point, he’s not panicked. He’s upset. Something went seriously wrong.”

Like what?

“Insufficient focus on the forensics. Had he himself placed the gun in her mouth, he’d have large amounts of blood spatter on his hand and jacket. Nothing of her body, no residue of her body parts, were on him. They were on her. Also their argument was, women do not commit suicide by shooting themselves in the mouth. Well, there is proof that 24 percent of female suicides have done that. Another thing, the facts are that 232 people were wrongfully convicted of crimes later overturned by DNA findings.”

In other words: we haven’t seen the end of this. Certainly, Lana Clarkson’s friends and family deserve to know the truth, just as Spector’s do.

Advertisements

Spector verdict breaks 40-year record — at what cost?

It wasn’t the first time I’d received a Batsignal from Phil Spector, but the one that came in on Monday morning, April 13, hinted that something was even more amiss than usual:

friends: while the jury deliberates my fate, the waiting is torturous and excruciating. therefore, i try to get out as much as possible when i am not “on call” to the judge and jury, daily, from nine thirty a.m. to 12 noon, and then again from one thirty pm to four pm. so i go to the [restaurant] in Alhambra for lunch between 12 noon and one thirty pm to get away for an hour and a half and still be close by the castle to return home quickly and get to the diner quickly from the castle at noon. if you care to join me for lunch please consider yourself invited. love,  phillip

Jim and I arrived at about 12:30. Spotting us, a waitress told us that Phil had arrived, then been suddenly called away. That could mean only one thing: the verdict was in.

There wasn’t time to get to the courthouse, park and go through two security screenings by 2:00, so I returned home, expecting the worst. And soon, the news came in, and it was the worst: second-degree murder, with bonus points for using a firearm.

Before I go into the death of Lana Clarkson and the resultant trials any further, perhaps I should explain where I came in. (pages 2-4 linked below)