CA vs. Spector – Verdict Watch Day One

So the jurors deliberated a total of 4 hours yesterday, and asked for one piece of evidence. About an hour and a half into the deliberations, they asked if they could have the gun, the Colt Cobra that killed Lana. I have no speculation on why they wanted that, but maybe they want to recreate the shooting – since they have been to the scene and saw the chair she was sitting in, and now they saw the animations from the prosecution’s closing arguments, maybe they are trying to see exactly what the trajectory would be if Spector was standing over her. I’d like to think it’s something like that, but who knows? They had the gun for a total of about 15 minutes before giving it back to the bailiff.

The jury also chose a foreman – it’s juror number 10, the one who takes the copious notes. Not too surprising, I guess. I figured it would either be him or the Dateline producer. And what do we know about juror number 10, besides that he could be my long lost twin brother? Well, we know that he’s 32 years old, a civil engineer, and that he lives in Spector’s neighborhood and ran into Spector once at Target. He owns a gun that he keeps for hunting and home protection. He has a n uncle who is a cop in Idaho and who was shot during a bank robbery. And he has a friend who committed suicide, as well as two friends who were shot accidentally while hunting.

He should be a meticulous and thorough foreperson, which is a good thing for both sides. I think this case has to be won on the evidence, not on emotion, no matter how much Spector and the child bride would like to influence the jurors with positive spin publicity, “Team Spector” buttons and attacks on the character of the victim. The repeated attempts by the defense to cloud the facts of the case with inflammatory and derogatory attacks on the witnesses has been shameful, and it speaks volumes about their faith in the cold hard facts.

And this use of the press to leak propaganda is nothing new – Spector has been doing this since the night Lana died, starting with his conflicting stories to the police.

In light of Spector’s newest interview, and the publicity blitz that the defense has been mounting, I’ve been looking at some of Spector’s first statements, and the things he has said to different people at different times. Since Spector chose not to testify, what he has said in the past, and what he’s saying now in interviews,  is really the only record we have of what Spector says happened.

One thing really jumped out at me in Spector’s very first interview with Detective Pineda at the Alhambra City Jail later in the day on February 3, 2003. Pineda came to the interview room thinking that Spector wanted to give a statement. When informed that he is being charged with murder, Spector’s first question was “Of Who?” His second question was “What is happening at my house?”

Pineda is preparing to leave the room, since Spector has specifically asked for his attorney, Robert Shapiro, and has asked to make his allowed two more completed calls, and as Pineda is leaving, Spector says to him: “Don’t leave me alone too long.” I thought that was chilling. Just chilling.

And when Pineda is preparing to leave, and leave Spector alone, something in Spector must go off, some kind of switch must be thrown, because that’s when he goes off. He doesn’t have a gun to wave around to threaten anyone with, but he does have his mouth – and in lieu of a gun, he shoots that off:

 

 

So, what do we get from this? Well, the first thing that kind of puzzles me is Spector says he “owns the House of Blues”. If he “owns the House of Blues”, wouldn’t he know whether or not Lana was security there – or even employed there? He says in the statement that she “pretended” to be security there and “pretended” to work there. And he seems a lot more concerned that people are “rummaging through my house” than that a woman was like dead in his foyer. Or, maybe not a “woman”, maybe a “piece of shit” which is how he referred to Lana.

But, at least in this statement he says “She blew her fucking head open.” At the castle, when he was being arrested, and as someone was, according to him “Standing on my head” – he tries to tell the officers that he can “tell them what happened”.

So, he can “tell them what happened”, but he doesn’t know “how it happened, but it happened, and I’m sorry it happened.” But he remembers exactly what happened later. And remember, this is before he was even arrested, when he was in the middle of being hogtied and handcuffed, when the police are securing the scene. I think this is the “best evidence” of what really happened that night, because Spector hasn’t had time to think about the implications of what he says, he hasn’t formally been arrested, and he probably still thinks his connections and the fact that he “owns the House of Blues” may trump some dead woman in his house.

The officer who responded, Officer Rodriguez, also wrote a report containing some statements he heard Spector say. Again, this was *before* Spector was arrested, and when he was still calling this an accident.

So the whole “She blew her head off” wasn’t mentioned until Spector had been at the Alhambra City Jail for at least 9 hours. When the officers were on the scene, it was still an “accident”, he didn’t know “how it happened” and he was “sorry it happened.”

I’ve always thought Spector should have stuck with the “it was an accident” story. Take a plea to voluntary manslaughter, do a year or two in jail and spend the rest either on house arrest or on some kind of controlled supervision. Would have been cheaper, quicker and done with a lot less publicity. People are easier on you, too, if you cop to something, do a little time and then go on with your life. It isn’t as nasty as when you proclaim your innocence and then get away with it, the way OJ or Blake did. People tend to question your innocence for the rest of your life, and you are never mentioned again unless the parenthetical phrase is attached – “one time accused murderer”.

So it seems that the first time the whole “she blew her fucking head open” line was heralded was after Spector had a little time in a dark and lonely jail cell, and had time to work out a scenario in his head. Reasonable scenario? Well, that’s what the jury is now deciding. Because if they find it to be a reasonable scenario, Spector may just spend the rest of his life with that parenthetical “one time accused murderer” label.

And the suicide scenario wasn’t just something told to the police and then never spoken of again until court – in the Spring of 2003 Scott Raab interviewed Spector for an article in Esquire magazine. In this article Spector says:

“It’s ‘Anatomy of a Frame-Up,'” he says, still softly, not much above a purr. “There is no case. They have no case. I didn’t do anything wrong — I didn’t do anything. I called the police myself. I called the police. This is not Bobby Blake. This is not the Menendez brothers. They have no case. If they had a case, I’d be sitting in jail right now.”

We know that this is false, that he never called the police.

“She kissed the gun. I have no idea why — I never knew her, never even saw her before that night. I have no idea who she was or what her agenda was. They have the gun — I don’t know where or how she got the gun. She asked me for a ride home. Then she wanted to see the castle. She was loud — she was loud and drunk even before we left the House of Blues. She grabbed a bottle of tequila from the bar to take with her. I was not drunk. I wasn’t drunk at all. There is no case. She killed herself.”

So we see where the whole “Lana took the bottle from the House of Blues” story started. But this is probably just as false as “I called the police”. And why would Lana “ask me for a ride home”. She had her own car there. And how would she even know Spector had a castle? She thought he was a woman!

The article goes on to state:

In early March, Michelle Blaine sent out an e-mail proclaiming that an L.A. radio station would report that the Sheriff’s Department was going to announce that Lana Clarkson’s death was the result of an “accidental suicide,” and that Spector wouldn’t be charged. The Sheriff’s Department responded by saying that the matter was still being investigated as a homicide. Robert Shapiro issued a statement expressing confidence that a thorough investigation would show that his client had committed no crime. Lana Clarkson’s family and agent insist that she would not have killed herself. She was shifting gears, her agent said, hoping to land a sitcom part, trying stand-up comedy, and took the hostess gig at the House of Blues VIP room to make her rent and hook up with some showbiz heavyweights.

And there is the Genesis of “accidental suicide”. And notice how everything that comes from the defense side has been disproved in court, and everything coming from the prosecution side in the form of statements from the family and Lana’s agent – has been proven as true in court.

And Rachelle, she of the gag order yesterday from the judge, has also been spouting the defense side from the moment she received her first payment and agreed to be Spector’s “wife” for the camera.

In an early posting on her website, dated back in 2005, she posted the following:

SERIOUS WORLD ISSUE OF INJUSTICE BEING DONE RIGHT HERE IN LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA!

–PLEASE READ BELOW A MAN’S LIFE IS AT STAKE–

How would you feel if you were being accused of the most awful crime possible?
Plus being rich, famous and have the media against you?
WHAT DOES ONE DO? SAY FOR INSTANCE PHIL SPECTOR?

This man built his way up from nothing! Just because he was lucky enough to reach fame and financial success; The media, the people, and the justice system have an agenda to take him down! The media and the district attorney’s office bring up “alleged” issues from 40 years ago? They have nothing recent? Nothing new to talk about? There are not any police reports, any audio tapes, any video tapes…ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!
….But hearsay of course from those who are probably out of work and want their 15 seconds of fame.
Phil Spector was secretly indicted. The grand jury heard only one side, in which could not be cross examined. His constitutional right to have a preliminary hearing was taken away. So the truth of what really happened is not out. The media does not mention that Lana Clarkson, this so-called angel, was a 40-year old washed up actress that could not keep a job, was on drugs and alcohol constantly, carried her own gun and played with it in her mouth. Did the police mention that it was her gun, not Phil Spector’s? Did the police fail to mention that the chauffeur was an illegal alien and could only understand a few words of english? Directly after the incident occurred he was threatened with deportation and put in hiding by the police. Did they fail to mention that Sheriff Meriman received a 1 million dollar book signing deal?
HMM…ohh….and isn’t it re-election time?
What a better way to get re-elected by ruining an innocent mans life?!
Please feel free to e-mail chelle about your thoughts on how to help Phil!

Which is full of deliberate misstatements, delusions and outright lies. “There are not any police reports….ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!” she crows, yet we know there *are* police reports from 2 of the 5 women who testified, and that’s not including any police reports from the people Spector threatened who *didn’t* testify.

“Phil Spector was secretly indicted“. Ummm…no, Grand Juries are typically closed off to suspects. That’s the law. “The Grand Jury heard only one side, in which could not be cross examined.” Well, but see, that’s the way Grand Juries work, Rachelle. It wasn’t just done that way for Phil Spector – it’s done that way *every time*. And if Spector was so upset that he was “Secretly” indicted, then why did Spector file a motion to have the transcripts of the Grand Jury, which are public record, sealed?

“His constitutional right to have a preliminary hearing was taken away.” Spector has no “right” to a preliminary hearing. And you know, you would think with the million dollar lawyers Spector has on retainer that someone would have explained this to the child bride –  you know, the one who thinks of herself as “intelligent”.

“The media does not mention that Lana Clarkson, this so-called angel, was a 40-year old washed up actress that could not keep a job” You know, even Julia Roberts can’t keep a job. She only works fro a few months at a a time, then oooppps, un-fucking-employed again. By the way – when was the last time Rachelle had a job?

“carried her own gun and played with it in her mouth.” This statement comes straight from Raul Julia Levy. And we know his “issues.”
 

“Did the police mention that it was her gun, not Phil Spector’s?” And this is the kind of lies and propaganda that makes the whole defense team look like they are doing nothing but trying to subvert the truth and spread misinformation. The defense has conceded that this was Phi’s gun, and when the story changes from report to report, with them making denials and then retracting the denials, well, it makes them look like they are lying about everything, and everything they claim becomes suspect.

If you have the truth on your side, there’s no reason to lie about the little details. There’s no reason to claim “It was her gun, Not Phil Spector’s.” Because when it is eventually testified to and not disputed that it *was* Spector’s gun, people wonder “Hmmm…. now why would they have lied about that?” Rachelle does her husband no favors by trying to disseminate untruths.

“the chauffeur was an illegal alien and could only understand a few words of english?” Again, even if I *wanted* to believe the defense, and Phil Spector, if I read this statement, and believed it and then saw the videotape of Adriano DeSouza at the police station giving his statement to the officers, what am I to think? That Rachelle is correct in saying he “could only understand a few words of english“, or am I supposed to believe my own ears and my own eyes when I see him obviously able to understand and communicate on that videotape taken just hours after the shooting? 

“Please feel free to e-mail chelle about your thoughts on how to help Phil!” I think we should all email “Chelle” with our thoughts on how to best help Phil.

But looking at past statements, and seeing how the official story has developed over time and with time to reflect on what the “best defense” would be, and seeing the kinds of things that have been put forth as truth from the defense team, we can kind of get an insight into the recent article, and whether or not Linda Kenney Baden was correct in saying that Spector never gave an interview at all, and how much weight we should give statements attributed to Spector, and whether or not these are “official versions” of what really happened.

On Anthony Samuelson’s Blog, he reports on what the Mail on Sunday says is Vikram Jayanti’s account of what “might have happened” that night based on all the evidence that the defense wanted to introduce, but were unable to do so because of the pro-prosecution judge. Is this Spector’s latest “official version”? Could be. But judguing from past “official versions”, we can assess and weigh how much credence to lend it.

The most striking part of the article is saved up for the last page. “Let’s go to the House of Blues now. What follows is the scenario that could plausibly be spun from all the material the defence has sought to present. That doesn’t mean it’s true. Just a hypothetical version of events.”

Per the hypothesis, when her shift is over Clarkson picks up a bottle of tequila from the bar, joins the chauffeur in helping Spector to his limousine and then gets in with him. There is some sexual foreplay in the car on the way from the House of Blues. (This, given that she was fully clothed at the time of death, saliva traces on her breast and Spector’s genitals.) At the house Spector does what he frequently does and tells Clarkson that he has guns all over the house and that there is one in the drawer next to her chair. If that makes her uncomfortable she should leave. She responds that she’s pretty comfortable around guns.

The hypothetical version of events then has Clarkson taking off her false eyelashes, Spector being “spacy” which happens when he thinks someone wants something from him, she desperate to make an impression on a “weird but heaven-sent potential benefactor”, reaching for the draw, pulling out the gun and making a bid for his attention. She quickly loads the pistol from the box of bullets in the drawer next to the empty holster. She waves it about. He pays her no attention and so it’s time for a party trick. She puts the barrel of the gun in her mouth.

From this point the story, says Jayanti, can go two ways. She’s sloppy drunk and pulls the trigger by accident or she has a moment of horrified clarity. “She’s 40, washed up and desperate and always thought she’d be the next Marilyn Monroe.

I just think it’s rather unfortuante that the jury won’t have access to the same material we have. I think it would be helpful to them, as well, in judging the defense and the “quality and character” of their evidence, as Linda Kenney Baden put it.