GUILTY CA - Lana Clarkson, 40, fatally shot, Alhambra, 3 Feb 2003

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Beth Karas and Jack Ford listed the LKB's 10 points today.

1.Location of wound and bullet.

Beth was saying about LKB mentioning it was self-inflicted intra-oral wound/with tissue and blood all being on the left side, but there was contamination due to Lana being turned on her left side, thus there was a purging of the blood and tissue from her mouth onto her blouse and left sleeve.

2.Blood spatter.

I need to listen to the tape again, for this one. LKB did say, if PS shot LC, he would have as much bl spatter on him as Lana. I think from what I remember, Lana's hands (back) had a gross amount of bl spatter, she may have had her hands in a defensive mode, catching the bl spatter.

3.Location of Clarkson's body tissues.

Again, the same as #1, I believe. The blood and tissue from Lana being turned on her left side (autopsy), thus purging and contamination.

4.Gunshot residue.

LKB, in her OS, stated, absence of evidence is proof of absence of guilt for proof of innocence however the GSR testing showed, LC's hands and PS's hands, both had GSR on them, or were in the vincinity of the gunshot. It cannot tell us who fired the gun. Lana' hands had a lot of particles of GSR, and PS very little, however, he was obvioulsy using the wet diaper found in front of the toilet. PS was running around the Castle! Lana was dead.

The criminalists for the D and the P have used the phrase, "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence". LKB likes it her way!

5.Clarkson's teeth.

LKB, stated, the gases will show her teeth propelled outward. Is not the case, as according to testimony, it was the 'gunsite', that caught on her teeth. It was the gun which shattered or broke her porcelain crowns.

6. DNA on bullet cartridges.

Not so, at least so far. On all 5 rounds the DNA from Lana's blood was on only the tips of the bullets.

7. Blood clotting on the wet diaper.

The P has presented, it takes approx 3- 5 mins for blood to clot, temp depending. LC's mouth was wiped, PS cleaning up. Beth was saying LKB stated something about the gunk out of her mouth, and he wiped her face immediately. ( I don't remember this part about her saying he wiped her face)
There were clots on the diaper tho. If he wiped it immediately, the blood would not have been clotted, and would have absorbed into the material IMO.


8.Scene was not cleaned up.

Gun wiped, blood in the grooves of the gun. That we know!

PS's jacket on the floor, so he didn't try to hide it. Along with the diaper, found in front of the toilet.

9.Gun not wiped down.

Again, gun wiped, and blood in the grooves of the gun.


10. Clarkson's acrylic nail.


Lana's natural nails in tact. LKB was to have said, the broken piece was from pushing on the trigger. I think, she said, it had been shot off--not sure tho, yet no burns on her finger. Where is it anyhow??????????????? Dr. Lee? He'll not tell :silenced:

----

Open to corrections and additions, it was very difficult trying to catch Beth's every word. I need to learn shorhand! :crazy:
 
OMG!!! I saw his name mentioned somewhere else :D but couldn't figure out just who he is. I didn't think Pie was very truthful from what I read of her testimony but he's sure not holding back any words in calling her an outright liar! It's really sad that when a defense team like Spector's has nothing to work with they have to resort to victim-trashing. :mad:

It just keeps getting worse and worse for the D! I sure hope the P takes PP to task. Bring on MB!


Panthera, do you know what happened today? There was suppose to be a D witness, who supposedly had been a friend of PP's, to testify in support of what PP had to say, in regard to backing up PP's view of Lana being depressed.

I had to leave today before the testimony started. tia :)
 
Werner Spitz is on the stand.

I absolutely love him, but he is wrong! He is explaining gun powder, how he found his point of view (suicide) etc. Of course, again, he is incorrect...but I really like this man otherwise. How did he come up with such a wrong conclusion? I hope that AJ will help him correct.

W
 
It just keeps getting worse and worse for the D! I sure hope the P takes PP to task. Bring on MB!


Panthera, do you know what happened today? There was suppose to be a D witness, who supposedly had been a friend of PP's, to testify in support of what PP had to say, in regard to backing up PP's view of Lana being depressed.

I had to leave today before the testimony started. tia :)
Sorry, but I can't watch the trial at work and with my hours, I don't get home until after court has ended for the day. I read at CTV that Dr. Spitz has been testifying yesterday and today, and will continue tomorrow. I guess from what I've read he's on cross-exam now by Mr. Jackson. Sorry I have no clue about Pie's friend. :)
 
Werner Spitz is on the stand.

I absolutely love him, but he is wrong! He is explaining gun powder, how he found his point of view (suicide) etc. Of course, again, he is incorrect...but I really like this man otherwise. How did he come up with such a wrong conclusion? I hope that AJ will help him correct.

W
I always find it amazing how different "experts" can come to such totally opposite conclusions from the evidence. I think the jury is just going to have to use common sense and put the totality of the evidence together which does not favor suicide.
 
MO, LaMer . . . it is no longer of question if, but when. After today's defense's "expert of everything" testimony and the 2 minutes it took AJ to turn him into a prosecution witness, I say PS will be heading to some California State Prison in about 2 months. What a frigging :loser:
 
Werner Spitz is on the stand.

I absolutely love him, but he is wrong! He is explaining gun powder, how he found his point of view (suicide) etc. Of course, again, he is incorrect...but I really like this man otherwise. How did he come up with such a wrong conclusion? I hope that AJ will help him correct.

W

I USE to have respect for this man, W but after his testimony today, I'm of the opinion that senality has set in. How in GAWD'S name can this man, during cross, state that PS played a PASSIVE part in Lana's death; thereby there was no reason to consider PS past acts, as he did with Lana's. :eek: :waitasec: :croc: was my initial reaction, and then I FOCLMAO! Is he SERIOUS??!!??

Even before AJ bought that point up, he immediatedly started his cross asking WS how much he was getting paid for his testimony. His answer . . . $5,000 a day. My jaw dropped to the floor, as CW's probably did, as he only received (I believe) $3,200 a day. After a quick calculation, AJ said $15,000.00 for the three days you've been here? WS . . . no . . . I've stayed more than one day when I've flown out here . . . I estimate approximately $45,000.00. My reaction :eek: :eek: :eek: and then my thought of "well there goes this dude's credibility" filled my head . . . then I danced all around the office.

I was floored by WS's more than obvious change in demeanor from direct to cross. Direct - arrogant and dimissive to any who would question his conclusion; Cross - on the defensive, wouldn't answer hypothetical questions and insisted he couldn't draw a conclusion other than the one he had. He did admit if evidence was presented that PS was 2 feet from Lana, he *might* reconsider his opinion, albeit his response was less than enthusiastic.

Off to do evening chores . . . but wanted to add my 2 cents, W. You are absolutely correct when you say WS is wrong . . . he's $45,000.00 and counting, richer wrong. :D
 
Awesome job LaMer!!! I watch the trial via the local channel, as there are no interruptions during testimony so I, of course, missed this.

After reading this, mooc, LKB's ten points are . . . well, pointless. I predict PS will be drugged to the nth degree when the Jury comes back with it's verdict . . . of guilty (again, mo) and it will take his lawyers 3 days to explain he's going to be living in a new, less accommadating "castle". :D
 
I was floored by WS's more than obvious change in demeanor from direct to cross. Direct - arrogant and dimissive to any who would question his conclusion; Cross - on the defensive, wouldn't answer hypothetical questions and insisted he couldn't draw a conclusion other than the one he had. He did admit if evidence was presented that PS was 2 feet from Lana, he *might* reconsider his opinion, albeit his response was less than enthusiastic.

Off to do evening chores . . . but wanted to add my 2 cents, W. You are absolutely correct when you say WS is wrong . . . he's $45,000.00 and counting, richer wrong. :D

That's actually not a lot of money for an expert witness in a case. We've had them go over half a mil in the past. They've got to review all of the documents of the case and all of the other experts' reports and testimony. Its very time consuming.
 
That's actually not a lot of money for an expert witness in a case. We've had them go over half a mil in the past. They've got to review all of the documents of the case and all of the other experts' reports and testimony. Its very time consuming.

I agree with this Jeana . . . I followed both the OJ and Scott Peterson's trial (Lee and Wetch(sp) in SP's case neared the 300g mark and NEITHER ended up testifying; AND we (as in CA. citizens paid that expense for that of a defendant). However, in this case, as well as in the SPeterson trial, the monies received by said "experts" were ten fold above the "expert" testimony that was regurgitated by said "experts". (imooc) The counter defense provided by Spitz was BEYOND lucdicrous . . . Lana coughed up blood after her spinal cord was dissected? No way in heck could this happen . . . much less travel across the room in a downward then upward pattern. Apparantly, experts now believe they can collect 50g plus and still maintain their reputations after spewing ridiculous theories hoping one jury member bites . . . to secure "reasonable doubt". Personally, I long ago lost respect for Lee, Wetch (sp?), Baden and now Spitz. MO, they all can be bought.

The question remains; do defense attorney's have that low of an opinion as to the common person's logic? Does a group of attorneys, that designate themselves to be a dream team, actually believe a jury will cow tow, in a mezmerized state, to their *heightened" sense of "what is" simply because they put it out there; ergo it is "reasonable doubt"?

If that's the case, I guess all those dogs Vick owned simply had boo boos from playing too rough?

My final thought . . . wouldn't be hard for me to say something is factual if you gave me $5,000.00 to stick with it. That's one month's salary for me . . . and to think I could make that in one day. Yo Phil . . . I'm available for HALF the price . . . and I wouldn't look any less credible. Promise. :cool:

No offense Jeana . . . just MO and :twocents:
 
Awesome job LaMer!!! I watch the trial via the local channel, as there are no interruptions during testimony so I, of course, missed this.

After reading this, mooc, LKB's ten points are . . . well, pointless. I predict PS will be drugged to the nth degree when the Jury comes back with it's verdict . . . of guilty (again, mo) and it will take his lawyers 3 days to explain he's going to be living in a new, less accommadating "castle". :D

Hi Acts, why Thank you!

I have been too busy to be keeping up with ole Philly Boy! LOL I have managed to read Kim's blog every night or so, when the kids went to bed at a decent hour LOL. Such has been life around here with the grandbabies!

Now I think, I am a free woman for awhile, maybe! I caught a bit of the trial today, so again I'll be looking to see when Kim's posting is up. I love her for all the recapping, she is the best!

Wasn't it a real hoot when PS asked for the day off today? Imagine! LOL I missed that part, but that is what I read. Imagine, his LKB not being there by his side. :boohoo: No sympathy from me, but I do hope she recovers and fast. I have sympathy for anyone with back pain, been there done that, but geeez there is help out there. It's not like she has to pick up anything, and someone can get her a wheelchair if she needs it. The show must go on. I think, after all the time invested in this trial, I would hate to see something derail it, especially since the wonderful DT has so many backs that seem to be working! Cripe, ole Bruce's venture should not be coming before Phil, do you think? Just like ole HL flying the coop, and I rather doubt he will return for quite awhile. IMO better to cut his losses than return and be raked over the coals again. However, I would love to see it, might even buy a ticket to LA for the occasion, if I knew in advance. Not going to happen tho, as who would volunteer to attend their own hanging? Like rats leaving the sinking ship LOL

Well I best stop rambling now, and I'm so ready to see PS taken off to jail.

Seems there is only a half day on Monday, no court on Tuesday, ---the rest excapes me. :doh:
 
I haven't been able to watch any of this since the defense started putting on their case...

Can you direct me to Kim's blog??? I need to catch up!
 
I agree with this Jeana . . . I followed both the OJ and Scott Peterson's trial (Lee and Wetch(sp) in SP's case neared the 300g mark and NEITHER ended up testifying; AND we (as in CA. citizens paid that expense for that of a defendant). However, in this case, as well as in the SPeterson trial, the monies received by said "experts" were ten fold above the "expert" testimony that was regurgitated by said "experts". (imooc) The counter defense provided by Spitz was BEYOND lucdicrous . . . Lana coughed up blood after her spinal cord was dissected? No way in heck could this happen . . . much less travel across the room in a downward then upward pattern. Apparantly, experts now believe they can collect 50g plus and still maintain their reputations after spewing ridiculous theories hoping one jury member bites . . . to secure "reasonable doubt". Personally, I long ago lost respect for Lee, Wetch (sp?), Baden and now Spitz. MO, they all can be bought.

The question remains; do defense attorney's have that low of an opinion as to the common person's logic? Does a group of attorneys, that designate themselves to be a dream team, actually believe a jury will cow tow, in a mezmerized state, to their *heightened" sense of "what is" simply because they put it out there; ergo it is "reasonable doubt"?

If that's the case, I guess all those dogs Vick owned simply had boo boos from playing too rough?

My final thought . . . wouldn't be hard for me to say something is factual if you gave me $5,000.00 to stick with it. That's one month's salary for me . . . and to think I could make that in one day. Yo Phil . . . I'm available for HALF the price . . . and I wouldn't look any less credible. Promise. :cool:

No offense Jeana . . . just MO and :twocents:

My :twocents: LOL, I realize $45,000 isn't that much either when looking back at what some of the others have charged in the past. Even so, when getting up to $300,000 fees and more is ridiculous imo, well sure they have a lot of reading, examining, traveling to do. (not to forget stretching and telling lies) Also, I guess for some I have witnessed, selling their souls doesn't seem to bother them, and the big bucks soothe their conscience, if they even have one.

Another thing, from experiences of some older people I have been familiar with, their savings and retirement plans made long ago, are not measuring up to keep up the same standard of living they were accustomed to, with the cost of living in today's inflation. What better way to line their pockets after retirement than to offer their services to highest bidder, regardless of their values, which 'perhaps' they once had.

Spitz made the comment, he doesn't need the money! Well, some here heard his testimoney, and even someone without his education and background knows blood spatter doesn't take turns/routes and whatever else he proclaimed about the spatter to reach PS's ladies jacket, six feet away or so with nary a spec further than the folds of Lana's dress.

Either he needs the money, the attention, or has become senile. Maybe Greedy should be included here.

Then we have VDM, HL, CW, Spitz, and Baden, and they all go running when called, don't they? Hey lets go see Phil, he has lots of money, let's go guys LOL

Well good ole HL, well he made a big goof, and look where he is now. China! Whatever fee he had been paid, doesn't matter, cause according to him, there are others who can testify to what he would, absent the missing small white irregular thing which appeared to be a fingernail, which SC witnessed him putting into a small vial, using tweezers, when she pointed it out! LOL

Baden isn't going to testify, and my guess is, he is protecting his reputation, rather than be humiliated. CW is not going to testify.

Wouldn't you just love to know how much PS paid for the dandy experts, especially the no shows?

So it seems after all, the house of cards is falling! To me, all the money in the world would not be worth my reputation. It appears, for some, they are willing to risk it.

I think you were right on, Acts, when you said:

"The question remains; do defense attorney's have that low of an opinion as to the common person's logic? Does a group of attorneys, that designate themselves to be a dream team, actually believe a jury will cow tow, in a mezmerized state, to their *heightened" sense of "what is" simply because they put it out there; ergo it is "reasonable doubt"? "

However, apply it to the experts too LOL Kudos to AJ, he took them on ( the ones who showed up,) and I would bet they were relieved to leave the courtroom and get the heck of of LA! LOL

As for Phil's attorneys, AJ has also made mince meat out of them too! How many witnesses called by PS's Dream Team has AJ turned to make points for the P? Oh so so many! :woohoo:

I have no idea, why I am even interested in this trial LOL :bang: But it keeps getting better and better eh? lol
 
My final thought . . . wouldn't be hard for me to say something is factual if you gave me $5,000.00 to stick with it. That's one month's salary for me . . . and to think I could make that in one day. Yo Phil . . . I'm available for HALF the price . . . and I wouldn't look any less credible. Promise. :cool:


I completely agree. Some of the experts in this case have zero credibility. They're more like advocates for Spector than impartial experts.
 
I think this article shows that some of the people who hold themselves out as experts are anything but.


http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,291452,00.html

The Kennedy Brewer case highlights a serious flaw in our adversarial criminal justice system — the use of expert testimony in complicated, advanced scientific fields. A charlatan like Dr. West, who has little respect from his peers, can with charisma and personality convince a jury to take his word over that of an expert far more careful and deliberate in his analysis. In some cases, indigent defendants can't afford to hire their own experts at all, leaving a state's expert like West as the only testimony on the available forensic evidence.

Forensic scandals have been troublingly common of late, with phony experts and fake results recently uncovered in Virginia, Maryland, Kansas, Illinois, and Texas, to name just a few. Courts need to take a more active role in weeding out the Michael Wests of the world before they ever take the witness stand.

But professional organizations also need to be more vigilant about policing their own. Dr. West's peers should more vocally have questioned his methods long before he was permitted to testify more than 70 times in courts across the country. One would think they'd step up their standards to protect the integrity and reputation of their respective fields. But these continuing scandals suggest another, far more important reason: to prevent bad science from sending innocent people to prison.
 
not sure 'where' I found this link, but just in case no one here has seen this article...

My Close-up, please...
...snip...
Lee is in China, and Spector's attorneys have cited his out-of-country status as the reason he has not testified. Precisely what Lee has been doing in China has not been discussed. But according to the Chinese Daily News, Lee is working on early stages of a mini-series based on his life....


Ah - another 'reality' show like Cutler's?? LOL! here's the link to read the rest of the story...

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/spector/2007/08/my-close-up-ple.html

hope that works!

so... I hear court starts at 1:30pm on Monday?? :rolleyes:
 
not sure 'where' I found this link, but just in case no one here has seen this article...

My Close-up, please...
...snip...
Lee is in China, and Spector's attorneys have cited his out-of-country status as the reason he has not testified. Precisely what Lee has been doing in China has not been discussed. But according to the Chinese Daily News, Lee is working on early stages of a mini-series based on his life....

Ah - another 'reality' show like Cutler's?? LOL! here's the link to read the rest of the story...

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/spector/2007/08/my-close-up-ple.html

hope that works!

so... I hear court starts at 1:30pm on Monday?? :rolleyes:
Hi Niner! From what I've read, the Judge and attorneys are going to the Castle on Monday to preview what the defense wants the jury to see. So you're probably right that court will start after the "lunch break". Thanks for the link about Dr. Lee. I don't get to see the live trial anymore since going back to work ~ just the recaps on CTV Extra. :cool:
 
I have been absent for a while and lurking "over there." I attended the trial on 2 separate ocasions. What prompted me to post this morning is "their" discussion of Anita Talbert (gossip). I suspected who she was whn she came and sat next to me and learned to immediately hate her? Why? It had rained early that morning and she was wearing a thick, vinyl light green raincoat which, whenever she moved, was so loud as it rubbed against itself that I couldn't hear testimony. Good reason, right? And no, she is not "skeletal" as someone over there reported but tall and very thin. So thin, in fact, that he legs were sticks, covered by fish-net stalkings.
I also overheard an unhappy bit of conversation TO DD which, however, was so painful that I would never report it.
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
55
Guests online
1,840
Total visitors
1,895

Forum statistics

Threads
605,255
Messages
18,184,771
Members
233,285
Latest member
Slowcrow
Back
Top