| Phil Spector case
Posted: 9/26/2007 10:23:05 PM | Hi:
The Phil Spector case was declared a mistrial today and what is getting to me is the lack of coverage that surrounded the trial. You have a famous music producer and a B-list actress dead in his home by a gunshout. Spectors team says she shot herself and the prosecuters said he shot her because she was trying to leave. A bunch of witnesses took the stand and spoke on how Spector would wave a gun around to prove his point. Spector's chauffer testified that Spector walked out with a gun in his hand and said "I think I just killed someone. Spector of course has the best lawyers money can buy. Granted this trial dragged on for five months or so. So how does Paris Hilton get every media coverage for a DUI yet the Spector case gets almost nothing, I mean technically they are the same basic theme of Celeberties buying their way out of trouble. Heck the Spector case has a lot of similarities to the OJ case. I don't get it, does anyone else understand it?
take care | |
|
| Phil Spector case
Posted: 9/26/2007 10:49:25 PM | I would speculate that people figured he did it. No suspense when you know whodunnit? It's been well documented that he had a history of keeping people against their will, threatening them with guns, etc, etc, etc...
When he was producing The Ramones and their album, he whipped out the pistol many a time and threatened them.
His ex wrote a book about his nutty behavior. He kept her imprisoned and under his lock and key.
If it quacks like a duck... it's probably a duck. Most of this generation don't even know who he is. Not much to titilate the public...
just a tabloid remake of that classic picture Sunset Boulevard, where the washed up actress kills the young writer? Yeppers, in my book, he did it. The only suprise... and disappointment, is seeing this case dismissed with a locked jury? | |
|
| Phil Spector case
Posted: 9/26/2007 11:46:28 PM | | I would really like to stomp the shit out of that little maggot...I read alot of articles on that murder in the Times I knew that little sonofa**** was gonna get off..I personally hate famous and rich scum that get out of doing time for breaking the law Our Bozo justice system.. | |
|
| Phil Spector case
Posted: 9/27/2007 7:06:02 AM | | I think the media didn't pay a lot of attention to this case because it is boring compared to other celebrity crimes. | |
|
| Phil Spector case
Posted: 9/27/2007 10:43:03 AM | | Dang! Court tv covered it almost everyday. To the point of boredom. | |
|
| Phil Spector case
Posted: 9/27/2007 11:34:02 AM | It was shown live on several networks websites, I know I watched it the whole way through. It was a pretty interesting trial. How it could be a hung jury I have no idea-he was clearly guilty IMO. There was not as much coverage as the Paris Hilton snoozefest but here in L.A. it was in the paper daily, blogs galore and it was discussed on talk radio.
Unfortunately, the network media spoonfeeds the masses with a bunch of crap and doesn't cover a LOT of things that are way more interesting and important. | |
|
| Phil Spector case
Posted: 9/27/2007 12:25:57 PM |
Spector of course has the best lawyers money can buy.
That's the answer to your question OP. BTW it's been all over the news here in the US, not as much as the Paris Hilton case but then he is not half as cute as Paris!
Just my opinion
Brandie46 | |
|
| |
| Phil Spector case
Posted: 9/27/2007 1:08:25 PM |
I don't get it, does anyone else understand it?
~OP~ I don't know if I understand it, but I can attest to a few things, simply because I'm a Certified Paralegal who has worked in the system for far too long. I watched the entire trial (because I have NO life  ) and the mistrial was, in my opinion three part.
1) The Judge spoke of Dr. Henry Lee with distain in front of the jurors ~ which is not only unethical, but "leading" in the eyes of the Court. Jurors should have NEVER heard the words "I find him less credible than Jane Doe, novice forensic expert on the LAPD Staff.";
2) The LA DA and Prosecutorial staff are infamous for over-charging and under-delivering of evidence; and
3) When jurors were allowed to visit the estate, to re-inact the limo driver's accounting of those five/six words "I think I just killed someone" ~ it was re-inacted, according to the limo driver's specific instructions as to where he was parked, where he stood and what he believe he heard......BUT......the jurors couldn't hear a word because of the extremely large water fountain which was directly next to the driver's side of the limo. That impeached the testimony of that particular witness and it made his testimony rather questionable. He said Spector was approximately 18 feet away, you couldn't hear a word the mock-Spector said, so they relocated the mock-Spector to three feet away, he repeated those words again and you still could NOT make out the actual sentence. This is on the Court record as evidence and it blew it. Much like the bloody glove.
Those folks down there need to STOP throwing the verdicts away. For a juror who is truly doing their job, following Jury Instructions (which I believe there were over 300 in this particular case for various issues) it leaves reasonable doubt.
I told a close friend the day the Judge defamed Dr. Lee that this would hang, acquit or mistrial and that was over a month ago. I have access via Pacer to the transcripts, which I did read, in part, nevertheless, the Court records are filled with blunders, misleading statements, missing evidence (on both sides) and a whole lot of "he said she said."
Personally ~ do I think he did it? I don't know, I was not there to view/see/record or hear the evidence in person and tv does NOT disclose everything, even when watching a trial live. I learned LONG ago, if you run on emotions you'll miss vital facts that could or could not be important to "reasonable doubt." Do I think he's a whack job ~ hell yes ~ his hair alone tells that story...tee hee, sorry....my sick sense of humor coming out.  The truth is, they need to charge him with Second Degree, with the juror option of First, retrial with an ethical Judge who realizes off-the-cuff cutting remarks about the world's leading forensic expert (along with Dr. Bowden's testimony in agreeance with Dr. Lee ~ dear me ~ that's a double whammy) and let the jury decide without bias. That is WHY there was a mistrial. In addition, on Appeal, this would have mistrialed even with a guilty verdict due to the remarks of the Judge on the Bench. There were just too many Marcia Clark/Christopher Darden blunders. It's a shame, but it's the system. JMO  | |
|
| Phil Spector case
Posted: 9/27/2007 1:22:20 PM | | If he were a boozing 20-year-old blonde with long legs and big bazoomas, you would've heard a lot more about this case. It just wasn't sexy enough - literally. | |
|
| Phil Spector case
Posted: 9/27/2007 2:05:44 PM | Hi:
The jurors have stated publicly that the vote to convict was ten to two. The prosecutors have full intention of trying him again and the first hearing is scheduled for next week. I wonder how this trial is going to play out.
take care | |
|
| Phil Spector case
Posted: 9/27/2007 2:42:49 PM |
Spector would wave a gun around to prove his point. Spector's chauffer testified that Spector walked out with a gun in his hand and said "I think I just killed someone.
You did know that Spector's mom and dad were first cousins?
It's in his biography.
does anyone else understand it?
Another arrogant prick gets to walk. | |
|
| Phil Spector case
Posted: 9/27/2007 3:07:12 PM | | I read they are going to try him again....I heard through the grapevine along time ago he was a weird and mean little prick...Servents of the rich, famous, and infamous do trade stories..... I hope justice is served the 2nd time around...I read an article the other day about O.J.'s book where he basically admits over and over again he's guilty of murder, fu*kers make me sick. | |
|
| Phil Spector case
Posted: 9/27/2007 3:35:33 PM |
The truth is, they need to charge him with Second Degree, with the juror option of First
I am surprised if you watched the trial every day you didn't realize that the charges were SECOND DEGREE Murder. And the judge was contemplating adding Manslaughter but it was too late, because the jury had already been deliberating. This never was a first degree murder case. | |
|
| Phil Spector case
Posted: 9/27/2007 4:21:35 PM | It is sad....same as the other "murderers" who have gotten off.
Even the CourtTV commentators have gone cynical (along with late night talk show hosts) and find sardonic humor in the antics of all parties; judge, jury, lawyers, experts.
Sadly, this behavior is in every aspect of our local courts. Those who have the money to prevail, do.
Justice has been (as in Biblical text) drug through the streets. Then in actuality, I would say this has been done from the beginning of time.
On a different note - not only Spector was celebrating, you can be assured, all his "highly-paid" lawyers, advisors, and experts are whooping it up also, readying themselves to spend that money!
Spector himself, will have quite a dent in his pocketbook and probably have a heart attack or some other illness before case resolved.
And his crude "baby" spouse....oh that's another story in itself....
-cmp- | |
|
| Phil Spector case
Posted: 9/27/2007 6:24:05 PM | I believe Spector killed that woman but convincing a LA jury is another matter.
I know a jury is supposed to be a cross-section of society but they need to issue IQ tests before they are allowed to serve. | |
|
| Phil Spector case
Posted: 9/27/2007 8:21:29 PM | I did not watch the Phil Spector trial, but I have served on a jury. I don't think IQ tests are necessary, but you do need to set aside whatever biases you may have, and follow the judge's instructions.
In the case I served on a couple of the jury members had already made up their minds that the defendant was guilty before we even had a chance to sit and discuss the evidence. After a gruelling three hours or so we all agreed on a verdict of innocent. It was very interesting and we had a chance to chat with the prosecutor afterwards and told her why we felt she did not prove her case.
Brandie46 | |
|
| Phil Spector case
Posted: 9/28/2007 6:48:48 AM |
Spectors team says she shot herself
Now THIS I believe.....have you seen the guy? Talk about FUGLY. | |
|
| Phil Spector case
Posted: 9/28/2007 1:37:49 PM | am surprised if you watched the trial every day you didn't realize that the charges were SECOND DEGREE Murder. And the judge was contemplating adding Manslaughter but it was too late, because the jury had already been deliberating. This never was a first degree murder case.
Manslaugher was IN the original subpoena, it was always an option until:
Spector Judge to Withdraw Instruction. The judge in Phil Spector's murder trial, struggling to help deadlocked jurors reach a verdict, is taking an unusual step that some legal experts say could make a conviction easily reversible on appeal. With jurors split 7-5, Superior Court Judge Larry Paul Fidler said Wednesday he planned to withdraw a legal instruction that some panelists cited as a point of dispute when they announced the impasse a day earlier. The judge sent the jurors home early on Wednesday and told them to return Thursday. The instruction concerns the prosecution's theory that Spector held a gun to actress Lana Clarkson's mouth, and that the weapon discharged, causing her death. It says jurors must find Spector comhttp://www.tabloidcolumn.com/phil-spector.htmlmitted that act in order to convict him of second-degree murder.
For the record, it was not deadlocked 10-2, it was nearly split.
Spector jury locked in 7-5 impasse The judge in Phil Spector's murder trial said he is considering giving jurors the option of finding the record producer guilty of a lesser charge than second degree murder after the panelists reported a 7-5 impasse following seven days of deliberations. Spector's defense team was expected Wednesday to vigorously oppose Superior Court Judge Larry Paul Fidler's expected proposal to help jurors break their deadlock, while legal scholars said a conviction on lesser charges could be vulnerable to appeal.
Also in the jury instructions was the option of First Degree and or/ manslaugher until the Judge withheld the lessor charge.. I guess I need to be specific in my posting. He was indeed initially charged with Second Degree, but with "special circumstance" in the jury instructions that manslaugher AND first degree were options. You are right about the intial on the record chage....however, first degree was instigated based upon the fact, although NOT pre-mediated, there was the opportunity of "forethough" which would have opened the door to First Degree and was added as a jury instruction early on is the case. The manslaughter opion was dimissed on day 3 of deliberations (I believe.) The jurors were left with special instructions to up the charge to First Degree (should they deem that appropriate based upon specific jury instructions added to and amended.) In essence, they were allowed to find "pre-meditation" based upon the time-line she was in his home and having a dispute of some sort with him. It was assumed at one point ~ that the jurors were dead-locked on the issue of first or second degree.....we now know that is NOT the case. JMO :101: | |
|
| Phil Spector case
Posted: 9/28/2007 5:39:28 PM | | I did not follow the trial, but my local paper reports: "a week ago, the jury foreman had reported a 7-5 split. After that Superior Court Judge withdrew a jury instruction that he decided misstated the law and issued a new one giving examples of what panelists could draw from evidence. " After that instruction, "a mistrial was declared Wednesday in the murder case against Phil Spector when the jury reported that it was deadlocked 10-2 in favor of convicting the music producer of killing actress Lana Clarkson more than four years ago." I'm just reporting what I read in my local paper, which may or may not be correct as we all know, but I am glad to hear they intend to retry him. It is always fascinating how screwed up a trial can become due to inept lawyers and judges! | |
|
| Phil Spector case
Posted: 9/28/2007 7:23:25 PM |
Also in the jury instructions was the option of First Degree and or/ manslaugher until the Judge withheld the lessor charge.. I guess I need to be specific in my posting. He was indeed initially charged with Second Degree, but with "special circumstance" in the jury instructions that manslaugher AND first degree were options. You are right about the intial on the record chage....however, first degree was instigated based upon the fact, although NOT pre-mediated, there was the opportunity of "forethough" which would have opened the door to First Degree and was added as a jury instruction early on is the case. The manslaughter opion was dimissed on day 3 of deliberations (I believe.) The jurors were left with special instructions to up the charge to First Degree (should they deem that appropriate based upon specific jury instructions added to and amended.) In essence, they were allowed to find "pre-meditation" based upon the time-line she was in his home and having a dispute of some sort with him. It was assumed at one point ~ that the jurors were dead-locked on the issue of first or second degree.....we now know that is NOT the case. JMO 
You are absolutely wrong. First degree murder was never considered by the jury. It was second degree murder. The instruction that was withdrawn concerned reasonable doubt. Manslaughter was never an option either. The judge thought about adding the option - and spoke about it in open court the first day the jury said they were at an impasse (7-5)
From CourtTV: "Jurors at Phil Spector's trial will face a stark choice between second-degree murder and acquittal when they begin deliberations next week.
A judge ruled Wednesday that jurors will not be allowed to consider manslaughter or other lesser charges "
Another from courttv: "Jurors deadlocked over Phil Spector's guilt said Wednesday that they were divided over a number of issues, including one particular jury instruction about reasonable doubt that the judge later removed from their consideration."
Also from CourtTV :"Deliberations in the Phil Spector murder trial were thrown into turmoil Tuesday by two striking legal developments: A deadlock in the jury room and a move by the judge to add a new count, manslaughter, to a case that has been in the hands of the jury for seven days" | |
|
| Phil Spector case
Posted: 9/29/2007 7:13:27 AM | The original charge against Phil Spector was under Penal code 187, which I read to be murder in the first degree as listed below in the California penal code. I am not a lawyer but it appears to me that vge certainly is correct about the charges. (I found his original charge on the web but have not copied for lack of space- look it up if you would like...perhaps he had to be charged under 188- but that is not how I am interpreting the information I found while searching on this...)
" PENAL CODE
SECTION 187-1999
187. (a) Murder is the unlawful killing of a human being, or a
fetus, with malice aforethought.
(b) This section shall not apply to any person who commits an act
that results in the death of a fetus if any of the following apply:
(1) The act complied with the Therapeutic Abortion Act, Article 2
(commencing with Section 123400) of Chapter 2 of Part 2 of Division
106 of the Health and Safety Code.
(2) The act was committed by a holder of a physician's and surgeon'
s certificate, as defined in the Business and Professions Code, in a
case where, to a medical certainty, the result of childbirth would be
death of the mother of the fetus or where her death from childbirth,
although not medically certain, would be substantially certain or
more likely than not.
(3) The act was solicited, aided, abetted, or consented to by the
mother of the fetus.
(c) Subdivision (b) shall not be construed to prohibit the
prosecution of any person under any other provision of law.
188. Such malice may be express or implied. It is express when
there is manifested a deliberate intention unlawfully to take away
the life of a fellow creature. It is implied, when no considerable
provocation appears, or when the circumstances attending the killing
show an abandoned and malignant heart.
When it is shown that the killing resulted from the intentional
doing of an act with express or implied malice as defined above, no
other mental state need be shown to establish the mental state of
malice aforethought. Neither an awareness of the obligation to act
within the general body of laws regulating society nor acting despite
such awareness is included within the definition of malice.
189. All murder which is perpetrated by means of a destructive
device or explosive, a weapon of mass destruction, knowing use of
ammunition designed primarily to penetrate metal or armor, poison,
lying in wait, torture, or by any other kind of willful, deliberate,
and premeditated killing, or which is committed in the perpetration
of, or attempt to perpetrate, arson, rape, carjacking, robbery,
burglary, mayhem, kidnapping, train wrecking, or any act punishable
under Section 206, 286, 288, 288a, or 289, or any murder which is
perpetrated by means of discharging a firearm from a motor vehicle,
intentionally at another person outside of the vehicle with the
intent to inflict death, is murder of the first degree. All other
kinds of murders are of the second degree.
As used in this section, "destructive device" means any
destructive device as defined in Section 12301, and "explosive" means
any explosive as defined in Section 12000 of the Health and Safety
Code.
As used in this section, "weapon of mass destruction" means any
item defined in Section 11417.
To prove the killing was "deliberate and premeditated," it shall
not be necessary to prove the defendant maturely and meaningfully
reflected upon the gravity of his or her act." | |
|
| Phil Spector case
Posted: 9/29/2007 8:50:37 AM | First degree...second degree...manslaughter.....who cares?
The poor woman was still killed by this freak and if all the jurors can't find him guilty then it will be a shame.
Here's how I interpret California law:
First degree murder-the defendant had premeditated the act in detail,hiring a killer also falls into this category.
Second degree murder-the defendant murdered a person in the spur of the moment or while commiting another felony.If a firearm was used this is usually the minimum charge(the proper charge for this case).
Manslaughter-the defendant acted carelessly and caused the death of another.An example:if the defendant ran over someone while drunk. | |
|
| Phil Spector case
Posted: 9/29/2007 9:03:11 AM | Phil Spector's mom and dad are first cousins? So that explains the hair! What a nutcase! | |
|
| Phil Spector case
Posted: 9/29/2007 10:40:07 AM | sactown:"First degree...second degree...manslaughter.....who cares?
The poor woman was still killed by this freak and if all the jurors can't find him guilty then it will be a shame."
You ask who cares, we should ALL care, this is our supposed justice sytem and there is a vast difference in sentencing guidelines for each charge, that's why we should care, seems rather obvious doesn't it? It's like being charged with a misdemeanor or getting a plea bargain to drop a felony to a misdemeanor - it means "you do the crime but you DON"T do the time." | |
|
Home
login 
