Breaking News!
TruTV's In Sessions anchor and attorney Lisa Bloom takes the stand as an out of order, prosecution rebuttal witness.
Lisa will be leaving In Session in June. She has been in a long distance relationship and as her daughter heads off to college, she will be returning to the sunshine state. Lisa is an analyst on CBS and that role will be expanding.
Ms. Bloom will most likely counter the testimony of Greg Sims. Stay tuned for an update!
Monday, March 9, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
30 comments:
While I am happy for Lisa Bloom, this confirms that there will be no reason to watch Court TV - whatsoever.
I knew it was a done deal when Catherine Crier was taken off the air - but I was holding out because I like Lisa Bloom.
Talk about ruining a good thing.
Thanks again Sprocket for your continual updates.
I totally agree. Since TRU TV took over it has gone down hill and I don't enjoy watching trials anymore. To Bad as I real enjoyed all the anchors. Since Lisa was not on TV today I figured she was the witness out of turn. I wish I could have seen this trial on TV as it sounds just as great as the first.
I'm happy that Lisa Bloom took the stand. I'm sure she will come off as a creditable witness. Can't wait to read what she says
WOW! I hope she is able/willing to discredit Greg Sims testimony, although he took care of that pretty well on his own IMO. Who believes someone that changes their story 3 times? Very suspicious!
I remember the Court TV people joking about Lisa having to testify after Sims called her before he testified. Then after he appeared on her show they joked some more. Not so funny now, huh.
I agree that TRUTV has lost whatever it had that made me addicted to COURT TV. Maybe it's because most of the redheads are gone. They were the most interesting. Beth is still great. How she covers a trial!
The People seem to have put on a much better and cleaner case than the first time while the Defense seems to never have found it's rhythm. But then, the facts are against them.
Looking forward to tonights report Sprocket. Thanks again
For those of you anxiously awaiting Sprocket's update (like myself!), here's a brief post-testimony interview with Lisa Bloom on TMZ.
http://www.tmz.com/2009/03/09/lisa-bloom-spector-witness-pants-on-fire/
-Velouria
TMZ has a clip of Lisa Bloom leaving the courthouse. She told the TMZ reporter that she told the jury that Sims had said the complete opposite about Lana when he was on her show. Sims told Bloom that Lana would never kill herself, wasn't suicidal. Lisa says she doesn't know why he changed his testimony now.. Spector must have paid him to change his tune.
Lisa Bloom is leaving? This is devastating news. The days of Bloom & Politan were great and when Vinny got the boot, I was sad. Now this. Well, she will be greatly missed and I wish her only the best.
Maybe we can have our Sprocket take Lisa's job! Just throwing out an idea............ Whatcha think, Sprocket?
Just listened to the TMZ clip. One defense witness goes down after another. Fascinating what people will do if they have the money and wherewithall to pay and influence people to bend the truth or downright lie.
i listened to the Lisa Bloom interview as she was leaving court. It's pretty amazing that Sims would get on tv and say that LC was not suicidal, and then take the stand and say something completely different. Weinberg must be crazy (as well as unethical) to try to pull this. I don't know how they thought they could get away with it. He has been completely discredited, and by proxy so has JHR. Amazing.
Ray
Thank you, Sprocket. You rock.
What would we do without you?
I'm sure this is taxing on you, but it is so appreciated as no one else is doing what you do and you do a fantastic job.
Oops, I forgot about Beth Karas and Jean Casarez. Okay, so there are still a couple of reasons to watch Court TV, but the talent is certaintly dwindling.
I watched the TMZ clip with Lisa - but I cannot wait to read Sprocket's update!
Finally! Someone steps forward to tell the truth! Right on, Lisa Bloom.
Excellent job, Sprocket! We all appreciate you for your reporting.
One more question, can they go through the archives at Court TV and show the trial the actual interview
when Greg Sims was on Lisa's show?
That should clear it up real quick.
Just a thought.
Here's what's happening today:
I apologize on not getting an entry up last night. I decided to take a break and catch up around the house.
There is no testimony today or tomorrow. Weinberg's next witness, Dr. Elizabeth Loftus, can not testify until Thursday, so testimony will resume then.
Counsel and the court are working on deciding on jury instructions. They will not finish this in two days; there will probably be more to decide upon after all the testimony has been presented to the jurors.
I will be working on my notes for yesterday this morning, and I "may" go down to the courthouse for the afternoon session, just to listen in on the deliberations over jury instructions.
My notes covering yesterday will be posted in a new entry when I'm finished.
Sprocket,
Even though I'm dying to hear the next installment, I hope you are getting a rest and catching up on your house and personal things. These last few days have been very interesting.
I've been waiting for the defense to come up with something coherent and it just doesn't seem to have happened. Greg Sims seems to have given the defense a complete black eye, what with the others.
What I get from your reports is that what the defense has to offer is muddled, vague, gossipy, and untruthful. What the prosecution has to offer is a careful exposition of a lot of evidence which points to a conviction.
We shall see what jury no. 2 comes up with.
Thanks again for great reporting.
Christine
Udpate:
My oh my, it seems if I don't post an entry (like as if I have an employer and a deadline, lol!) within someone's preconceived time frame, that means it must have been a good day for the defense and that I'm unwilling to publish that.
The reality is, I spent last night cleaning my house instead of posting.
So here's the latest:
The defense finished with Dr. Seiden a little after 4:00 pm yesterday. As I mentioned earlier, the jurors are on a break until Thursday when the defense will call Dr. Loftus. From everything I've seen/heard, this will be the last witness in the defense case-in-chief.
If we are lucky, this witness will only take one day to testify and not go into Monday. That would mean the prosecution would start their rebuttal case on Monday, the 16th. Last I heard, the prosecution said they would call three witnesses and their rebuttal case would take three days.
After that, we have the defense putting on sur-rebuttal witnesses. This is when I believe Punkin Pie will be called. It's unknown how many other sur-rebuttal witnesses Weinberg plans on calling. So it is unknown how long after those three days of the prosecution's rebuttal case, the defense's sur-rebuttal will take.
This could change at any moment, but, at this point, I see the trial getting to the jury sometime late this month, possibly as early as the 25th of this month, or later.
It was agreed by all parties the week before that the court and counsel would work on jury instructions Tuesday and Wednesday while the jurors got to go back to work.
I did not go to court today. I took advantage of no testimony and decided to stay home an get caught up on responsibilities.
However, there was a court trial watcher who emailed me from the courthouse what happened today. Thank you so much!!! You know who you are. You're the best!
As a matter of "sua sponte" Jackson presented to the court an option of lesser included charges: manslaughter. That was opposed by Weinberg. I did not find out if Fidler has ruled on this completely since all the testimony is not in yet.
My understanding is, Mr. Jackson explained that as representing the people, he has an obligation to present this to the court. You legal eagles out there I'm sure will be emailing me asap and/or leaving a post if I am wrong about that.
I remember when this issue was debated during the first trial. I was there. If I'm recalling correctly, Fidler ruled that the location of the gun (behind the line of the teeth) excluded the lesser included charges because there was no evidence presented where, the gun would have gotten into Ms. Clarkson's mouth, accidentally.
The other thing that happened today was, Spector wanted Dennis Riordan to be involved in jury instructions so court was adjourned until 10:30 am, tomorrow. My question is, did Spector spring this request on the court at the last moment? I mean, they knew ahead of time that they were going to go over jury instructions Tues & Wed last week!
Lisa Bloom's testimony:
I think she was a good witness for the prosecution. There were a few areas that Weinberg was able to bring up on cross and point out to the jurors that she did not remember specific things.
I understand from trial watching sources inside the courtroom that Spector was overheard making a comment after she exited the stand. The comment was similar to other comments Spector has made about women in the past.
I am not a journalist, nor do I have any legal training. I'm not qualified to take over Ms. Bloom's job. Besides, moving to New York is not that appealing to me.
CourtTV archives:
The taping of Greg Sims on the CourtTV show was played for the jury during Sims's testimony to impeach him. It was also played for Bloom's testimony. Other statements Bloom made about Sims and Spector were played for the jury on cross.
Sprocket, is there an area on your site where you accept donations for your work?
Let me know.
Your Fan in Ohio
Donations:
Thank you so much for thinking of me.
You can donate to help pay for Scout's surgery, since that expense has set us back while my husband has been on disability for the past year, and will be disabled for a bit longer.
There is a Paypal link at the very bottom of the list of labels.
ALL HAIL SPROCKET!
I am one of the ones who said the defense should just "hang it up" after the Pex debacle; that wasn't done and as a result, the hole that was dug by that side is much deeper than it was 2 wks ago...not that I mind that. If Pie is their main sur-rebuttal witness, it shows just how low and how desperate they are, just throwing any and all against the wall and hoping something will stick. The DA will crucify her!
Being unemployed, I would enjoy flying out and court-watching. I have the time, but not the money!
Wes J.
Is it true that (after Weinberg read Greg Sims prior testimony from the first trial to Bloom, where Sims testified that Clarkson was profoundly depressed and in despair) Weinberg played clips from a prior TV show where Lisa Bloom said that everything Sims testified to was consistent with what Greg Sims told her personally and in the interview she conducted?
How did this help the prosecution?
Hi Sprocket,
Thanks so much for the latest update (4.23 p.m)! I'm afraid that your posts are so excellent that many of us have become totally addicted to them and so we get a bit stressed when they don't appear as expected!!
That's what you get for being SO good at reporting all the goings on!
Many thanks again. You are fantastic.
Lee
Oh My Word! Do you mean that Spector called Lisa Bloom the "C" word?
Again, many thanks to you, Sprocket, for your dedication to letting the public know what is happening in this trial. You deserve your time off but I still can't wait to see your detailed entry for Monday's proceedings!
I do have one question: what does "sua sponte" mean again? I recall hearing it in the last trial but I forget it's meaning.
First, it is irresponsible to throw out vague un-attributed allegations that Phil Spector said something about Lisa Bloom ‘similar’ to what he has called women in the past. You invite unfair, unfounded speculation.
Second, since Lisa Bloom admitted under oath Monday that she called Spector a very derogatory Yiddish word in the same sentence she called him a "little Jew," Spector has good reason to be upset. It would be hard to top that insult—especially since Bloom uttered her own on national TV.
Irresponsible, vague and un-attributed allegations:
First, it's not an allegation; it's fact.
Second, what Spector said was heard by three independent individuals in the courtroom. Fact, what they heard corroborates each other.
Third, since you imply that Spector had "good reason" to be upset, then it's not a leap to conclude that he did say something in response to Ms. Bloom's testimony.
Fourth, in my opinion, Spector's comment clearly tops what Ms. Bloom called him on national television.
For reference, here is the a link to the definition of "nebbishy."
http://mw1.meriam-webster.com/dictionary/nebbishy
Hardly qualifies as "very derogatory" in any reasonable person's book. LB also stated on the stand that she is Jewish.
Word definitions:
For the record, here is what wikipedia has to say about the word "nebbish."
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/nebbish
Anon @ 5:10 pm:
Bloom countered that Weinberg was playing just a few words from everything that she said. She said that was taking her words "out of context."
Lisa Bloom was commenting on her show about Sims's testimony from the first trial, and not the second trial.
The prosecution addressed this in cross, directly afterwords.
Nebbishes were a popular little cartoon figure in the 50's, not only did people call other, rather unexceptional people nebbishes, but there were figurines of Nebbishes sold. There are also several books out about Nebbishes. I think Phil, if you take all his outbursts and grandiose stories about his own importance away, really is a nebbish like figure with little there. I don't think it's considered anti-Semitic to call anyone a Nebbish.
Post a Comment