" WHY, oh WHY WHY do we as a society keep paying the price for such chicanery."
W, my sentiments exactly! Seems the more money a defendant has the longer the trial=the more $$$$$$$$ for the taxpayers! Ha and the defense attorneys line their pockets! In this case, it is only prolonging this creep from going to jail, and I wouldn't be surprised if something doesn't happen to = a mis-trial, to prolong PS from going to jail! I wouldn't be surprised if he didn't try to take off! Then what a waste of time in money for the taxpayers, wouldn't that be totally disgusting!
I missed the action today, again! Not to worry tho, lol, this trial seems to go on forever. Plourd or Rosen, I forget which one, has to have a long weekend, so there is time to play catch up!
Again, I am relying on the media for my updates, but from reading over 'thar', all seems well for the P, as again the D called an expert, which made one wonder if the D was really up on their game. LOL I don't see any way this bird can be found NG, but then again........for me Adriana was very credible, when he testified hearing PS say, "I think I just killed somebody", and I hope this resonates with all 12 jurors too. That along with his history of threatening women with guns, wiping of the gun, not calling 911, why drag this out?
Anyhoo---The Darwin, gives a complete run down of today's court session---see one doesn't have to be chained to the TV and Computer! :crazy: Cause that doesn't seem to work for me! I can't sit still that long! :dance:
The Darwin, recaps little of Raul Julia Levy, Baby Dol Gibson, (can these characters even be for real-coming out of the woodwork LOL), James Pex, a blood spatter expert, who has never been to the scene or observed PS's female jacket, and Dr. Joseph Anselman a oral surgeon and forensic
odontologist.
Something from over thar, which I found very interesting, was a post made by Houdininisback recapping her day at court yesterday, and the players she was able to meet. WOW she even was able to talk to Mr. AJ, the DreamBoat! Aha and she had a conversation with PP in the restroom too! LOL Check it out, velly interesting, and Dini was attending court today also, so there will be more to come.
Between Sprocket and her blog and now Dini, it makes the trial almost come to life as in almost being there.
One of these day, I am going to attend one of these trials. I am going to be in the LA area in September, but hopefully this PS fiasco will be over by then-- and he will be :behindbar by then! :behindbar
http://thedarwinexception.wordpress.com/
CA vs. Spector - Spank My BabyDol and Call me Julia
Posted by thedarwinexception on July 18th, 2007
-snipped- good pictures here too--this so far is one of the best by The Darwin Exception, imo.
And James Pex is interesting in that one wonders if he is supposed to be Henry Lee version 2.0. He says upon taking the stand initially that he and Linda Baden Kelly just met 2 weeks ago, which would coincide with the whole Lee fiasco and when Lee could have first told the defense that their piddly *advertiser censored* case wasnt worth tarnishing Lees reputation.
Pex is also interesting because he was one of the investigating officers for the Oregon State Police Department in the Dianne Downs murder case when she shot her three kids in the backseat of her car. He analyzed the blood spatter in the car and after determining that there was no blood on the steering wheel and determining the spatter on the seats in the car he concluded that the shootings could not have happened the way Downs reported.
Linda Kenny Baden leads the witness through direct testimony, where she has him testify that he had problems with the Luminol testing, and whether or not they were done correctly. One of the reasons he is concerned is because there was no presence of blood detected underneath the gun as it lay under Lanas leg on the carpet. Pex states that there should be blood under the gun, which is rather confusing to me, because I think that is assuming an awful lot. Its coming to a conclusion based on an assumed premise. Assuming that Lana was the only one who touched the gun that night, and that where it was found was exactly where it had been all night after she was shot, then yes, I would think that there should be blood on the carpet underneath the gun. But since we know that Phil Spector held the gun that evening *after* Lana was shot, even if one assumes for the sake of argument that he didnt pull the trigger, we still know that he was holding the gun at *some* point, according to the testimony of DeSouza, who saw him with the gun in his hand, and the physical evidence of the blood in his pants pocket being consistent with a gun being placed inside of it.
And armed with this information, that Spector held the gun after she was shot, then I think that whether or not there is blood under the gun is irrelevant and proves nothing.
Linda Kenny Baden then employs a bit of sleight of hand and sneaky tactics.
She shows a picture to the witness of a very small piece of wire. This wire is from the taser gun that was unsuccessfully shot at Spector when the stormtroopers stormed the castle. In the picture the wire is visible under the right heel of Lana Clarkson, implying that the body - or at least the legs and/or feet - of the deceased were moved *after* the stormtroopers entered the premises, therefore calling into question any evidence of blood spatter, the placement of the gun and other physical elements of the crime scene.
Now, if you look closely at this picture, you can *barely* see the very thin wire underneath the heel of her right shoe. But this picture and the angle of this picture is quite misleading. It would appear from this angle that the right heel is flush with the floor, therefore making one assume that the leg would have had to have been moved in order for the wire to get underneath the heel. And we know she didnt move the leg herself.
But if we look at the same thing from a different angle
it is much easier to see that actually, the toe of the foot was raised, as was a portion of the heel. It is much easier to imagine that the wire could have been inadvertently kicked or moved underneath the heel with no movement of the feet or legs. So this issue again, proves absolutely nothing once you are armed with all of the facts and the evidence.
Linda Kenny Baden also asks the witness about kinetic energy and Stokes Law, which is about as foreign to me as the earlier testimony from that creepy DiMaio about Boyles Law. But I do wish I had paid attention in Physics, because all of this testimony might make a lot more sense to me. And it might even make it more interesting, but Im not putting any money on that last sentiment, because I cant imagine Kenny Baden livening up anything she was questioning a witness about. I find myself distracted by her almost neon yellow hair color, her glasses that just dont fit her face right, her strange accent and speech patterns and her almost eerie resemblance to a pug faced dog my grandmother used to own named Tippy.
On cross examination Alan Jackson doesnt really need to do a lot, since the witness has already testified, during direct no less, that he has not been to the scene of the crime and that he has not seen the physical evidence. So, basically, the witness can only really testify with any authority in generalities. But Jackson does question the witness about his concerns with the way the Luminol testing was done, and the witnesses astonishment that there was no blood on the carpet underneath the gun. Jackson asks the witness if he would expect there to be blood on the carpet underneath the gun if the gun had been wiped down, greatly increasing the drying time of any blood that was left on the gun, and if the gun had been placed underneath the victims leg after it had dried.
The witness concedes that if these things were so, then, No, he would not expect to find blood underneath the gun, and that if the blood on the gun had dried then if the gun had been moved, he would expect to find flakes of blood on the carpet if the gun were later moved. Which leads Jackson to ask him if the gun *had* been moved, say, kicked across the carpet, after the blood on the gun had dried, then would the witness expect there to be flakes of blood consistent with this across the carpet. When the witness agrees that yes, he would expect to find these flakes, Jackson then asks that if there was no presence detected with luminol of any streaks or flakes across the carpet, if the witness would then assume that the gun was *not* kicked across the carpet, the witness says that this could be one interpretation.
Jackson then turns to the wire underneath Lanas heel. Although I really thought he would just put up on the Elmo the other pictures showing the different angles of the foot, and ask the witness to determine if there were sufficient room for a wire to be kicked underneath the foot, Jackson instead uses his co-counsel as an exhibit, and has Dixon sit in his chair comfortably with his legs extended. Jackson then places a wire in front of Mr. Dixon, kicks it and has it land underneath Dixons shoe. I think the pictures from an alternate angle would have been more telling.
Jackson then gets into testimony concerning Velocity and then heat resistance. When the testimony moves towards any specific physical objects from the Spector crime scene, the witness has a more difficult time being pinned down, and his stock answer is I didnt see the physical evidence or I would have to examine that item more closely before rendering an opinion. Which only highlights the fact that he isnt Henry Lee, who actually did have access to the crime scene and the physical evidence.
But., in a nutshell, this witness could not really be relied upon to definitively offer an opinion on *this* case, since he did not have access to the physical evidence or the crime scene and wasnt familiar with many of the prior witnesses testimony.
Although Linda Kenny Baden did ask him what color blood was, and he answered red. She also asked if a bullet comes out of the barrel of the gun, and he answered yes. And she described inflated cheeks as chipmunk cheeks. Since none of these things were challenged by the prosecution, I think we can assume they are definitely so.
And I, for one, am glad we finally got an expert opinion on the color of blood.
Dr. Joseph Anselmo, an oral surgeon and forensic odontologist who retired from the LA County Coroners office in 2004. He was first contacted in this case to confirm that the teeth at the scene were actually Lanas and to determine if there was any soft tissue damage around the lips and so forth and if there was any evidence of blunt force trauma to the teeth. He says that he found no evidence of blunt trauma or soft tissue damage. He also says right off the bat that he is not qualified to comment on any aspect of the ballistics involved or the trajectory or path of the teeth that were affected by the bullet. All he can testify to is the trauma to the teeth themselves and the identification of teeth matter as teeth.
And then court ends.
For the rest of the week.
No more evidence will be presented until Monday.
But remember, blood is red.
--Seeya'all-later (I have 2 more sets of company coming) but will try to keep up--lol--terrible to be addicted huh?
