HBO & David Mamet's Tele-Play on Phil Spector History

 Phil Spector prison booking photo.  

This is how Spector really looks.

UPDATE: 4/3
If you think that, the disclaimer that was placed at the beginning of Mamet's film is all that's needed to inform the public that the movie is totally a piece of fiction,  you are mistaken. A few moments ago, the following Google® search hit my blog:

"how did the prosecution deal with the bloodless white dinner jacket in the second Phil Spector trial"

Do you see how this film twists the facts regarding the evidence presented at both trials?

There was backspatter found on the front of Spector's jacket.  There was also a tiny spot of backspatter that was found on the edge fold of the end of the right jacket sleeve, indicating that fold was pointed directly at the source of the spatter.

During the first and second trial, the defense tried to tell the jury that if Spector had been in the vicinity of when Lana Clarkson was shot through the mouth, his white jacket would have been covered in blood.  The truth is, bloodstain analysis experts testified that backspatter from a high velocity event (gunshot wound) does not travel very far at all.  Backspatter droplets will be tiny, mist like.  And because of their size, they rarely travel more than 2-3 feet from the source (injury).  Sprocket.

UPDATE: 3/26 Corrected link to Harriet Ryan's article.

I had hoped to get this post up last week, but alas, real life responsibilities to Mr. Sprocket’s business kept me from writing.  HBO’s Spector movie aired Sunday, March 24th, 2013. My apologies. Sprocket.

It began over a week and a half ago. It seemed like every other email, tweet and Facebook posting I received, was about the upcoming release of David Mamet’s Phil Spector movie on HBO.  Sprocket!  Did you hear about the movie?  Rachelle is going to be on CNN’s Piers Morgan!  Are you going to see the movie?  Did you see Rachelle?  What do you think?  You have to write about it and tell the truth. The film totally trashes Lana.

Lana being Lana Clarkson, the tall, strikingly stunning woman who was murdered in Spector’s mansion in the early morning hours of February 3rd, 2003.  She had been shot through the mouth while sitting in a foyer chair, her purse on her shoulder, waiting to be driven home.  Spector was convicted of second degree murder on April 13th, 2009.  He is serving 19 years to life.

Some people consider me an authority on the Phil Spector case because I'm the only journalist who attended most of the first trial and every single day of the second.  It's the case that launched T&T and started me on my journey of attending murder trials and writing about them.

For me, the movie is old news.  I’ve known about the HBO film since it was announced that Al Pacino would play Spector back in October 2010. That’s how long it’s been.

I first reported on Mamet's film  when it was announced that Bette Midler had joined the cast. Midler had to drop out six days into filming due to an injury and Helen Mirren took over the role of defense attorney Linda Kenney Baden. As you can see, Mamet’s film has been in production for a long time.  Since the film was announced, I covered two first degree murder trials, Casey Anthony was acquitted of murder and Los Angeles County elected a new District Attorney.
 
Mamet has given interviews discussing the focus of his film as far back as June 2011.  I wrote about Mamet’s comments that he gave in a Slate.com article not long after that.

I’ve known from the very beginning that Mamet --who never followed the trial-- based his movie entirely on watching filmmaker Vikram Jayanti’s documentary, The Agony and the Estacy of Phil Spector, which was basically a love-letter account of Spector’s life and the murder charge, from Spector’s point of view.  (If you read any of the reviews of Mamet's film, most don’t mention this important fact.)

Although there are archival clips of other people in the documentary, Jayanti interviewed a single subject for his film, Spector --which begs the question, how objective could Jayanti’s ‘documentary’ be? Jayanti spent several months with Spector, much of it during the first trial.  Jayanti would come into court and hug Spector in the gallery.  Everyone who was there saw the public displays of affection. It was all part of the “show” if you ask me.  Jayanti was courting Spector, even during his murder trial.

So, if you can keep all that in context --that the film is not based on any of the facts presented at the trial-- then tune in to watch Al Pacino give an over the top performance as the maniacal Spector, and Helen Mirren in the role of sickly, mothering defense attorney, Linda Kenney Baden.

The Trial Bride
I can’t write a piece about Spector without mentioning his gold lamme-clad supporter and spouse. Phil Spector’s trial bride (Rachelle) recently appeared on CNN’s Piers Morgan talking about the film.  From what I read on Gary and Louis Spector’s Facebook pages, she was not invited to the start-studded premiere (although former prosecutor Alan Jackson was).  According to Rachelle, the trial bride and Spector were not consulted for the film.  As far as catching the Morgan show, I saw enough of the convicted murderer and the ‘screech she tries to pass as singing’ misses during two trials to last me ten lifetimes, which is why I took a pass on watching.

Reviews
Back when I first heard about the film I thought for certain I’d watch it, just to see what Mamet would do with his limited knowledge of the trial that convicted Spector.  But as more information came out about the film (Linda Kenney Baden inaccurately presented as Spector's lead attorney, Lana Clarkson’s character trashed, etc.) I decided it wasn’t worth my time.

Alan Jackson, who prosecuted both cases appeared on CNN 7AM weekend show on March 16th to talk about the overwhelming evidence that convicted Spector.  Unfortunately, I missed seeing Alan talk about the case of his career.

The LA Times’ Harriet Ryan wrote a very good piece  on the film.  During the first trial, Ryan worked for CourtTV and was in the courtroom every day that I was there.  She knows exactly what evidence was presented at trial.  She dropped in on the second trial a little over a dozen times.

Ken Levine’s review hit the nail on the head. It is a must read for the comparisons he makes and how Levine puts the film in context. Levine starts off his piece by stating: “If David Mamet had made LINCOLN, the official cause of the president’s death would be boating accident.”

My friend, historian and lecturer Barry Bradford saw the film and wrote a review titled, David Mamet Is A Murderer.  In Bradford’s view, Mamet committed two murders. Mamet “murdered the truth” and then “murdered the reputation of Lana Clarkson.”

All I can say now is, I’m glad it’s finally aired and reviews about the film are informing people about the incredible amount of creative license Mamet took in telling this story. If you would like to know more about the film, here are a list of reviews.

Robert Lloyd, LA Times TV critic
Robert Bianco in USA Today
Mail Online 
Ed Siegel in The Artery 
Tim Appelo in The Hollywood Reporter 
Matt Zoller Seitz on Vulture
Vikram Jayanti in The Daily Beast “My Dark Days With Phil”

The Case Against Casey Anthony: All about motions going nowhere...

Today, one motion was shelved for future reference and one was half-granted.

Jose Baez topped the list. He spoke briefly and stated that the purpose of his original motion remained the same (to have the jail video of Casey's reactions sealed). The only difference was that his new motion, filed yesterday, merely added more information to assist the judge in making his decision.

Linda Kenny Baden then began discussion of the motions. She requested that the motions be adjourned until the defense was able to complete the deposition of Lt. Tammy Uncer and possibly take others. She indicated she would be willing to pass the additional information on to the judge as the depositions continued.

State's Attorney Linda Drane Burdick then explained to the judge that in the original motion filed in March that the defense intended to seek action against Orange County.

Tammy Giffin, the attorney for the Orange County Department of Corrections pointed out that she had received the new motions last night and still did not have copies of the related depositions. She also stated that the new motion contained many allegations against the county and she needed sufficient time to prepare for a hearing on the matter. She also said that she had already filed a motion on this issue.

Drane-Burdick then pointed out that the State now had the tape and that it was turned over to Mr. Baez, making it now a public record. In addition, the new motion had not been delivered in a timely manner for her to prepare to respond to it. Lastly, Drane-Burdick pointed out to the judge that the media had not been "noticed" on either of the motions and had the right to speak. As there were no attorneys for the media, Judge Strickland gave them seven days to respond.

From what was said in court today, both the State and the defense have no problem with keeping the video under seal. It's too bad Baez didn't "notice" the media and the whole issue of the video could have been over today. Now, the media attorneys have a week to come up with arguments to convince Judge Strickland that it should be released.

I have another issue with these motions that someone who knows the law a lot better than I could help me with. Wouldn't the defense have been better off separating the issue of the release of the video from any actions they would like to take against the entities which plotted to violate Ms. Casey's rights (State, Federal, medical, etc.) and make it a separate motion? That would have made life much simpler. At this point, this layperson feels that the whole issue is a terrible mess, or perhaps a "loco-motion"?

At this point, there was a pause in the hearing and Jose Baez "introduced" the new death penalty qualified attorney, Andrea Lyon (The Angel of Death Row), to the court along with a mini-curriculum vitae. State's Attorney Jeff Ashton tossed out a zinger to Baez, saying that while he appreciated the "commercial," he would appreciate receiving her documents which would admit her pro hac vice and certify her as being death penalty qualified.

Baez didn't take the comment well and mumbled something about "... not to belittle it to a commercial when some one's life..." He was interrupted by Judge Strickland who commented that, it was a "plug for her successes." Jeff Ashton laughed at that one.

With the first two motions addressed and postponed yet again, the hearing moved on to the motion for the phone records.

Attorney David Evans spoke for Roy Kronk, the meter reader who discovered Caylee's remains. He had already spoken with Baez and had agreed to a time restriction of January, 2008 to the present. However, he objected that the motion needed to be carefully crafted to limit the records to those numbers related to the case. He cited case law which promoted Mr. Kronk's right to privacy. He asked that the defense provide a list of numbers and why they want them. Judge Strickland agreed that this solution was agreeable to him.

Attorney Kirk Kirkconnell then spoke for Amy Huizenga. He agreed with the case law provided by Mr. Evans and went on to state that he wanted an end date of the day Casey was arrested since the two had no unrecorded communication since that date. He also made a distinction between phone calls and text messages. He indicated the difference was that phone calls have no content, text messages do. Mr. Kirkconnell's main objection appeared to be the release of the phone numbers of Amy's doctors, family, pizza delivery man. He stated that the media would be calling them all. Kirkconnell also indicated that Baez had an alternative way to find out the record of calls and messages between Amy and Casey. He has Casey's phone records, and Amy's are all there!

Somehow, I think Baez wants more numbers than that.

My favorite attorney of the day was Jesse Gund's lawyer, Marty White (I hope I got his name right.) He approached the podium and proceeded to give a well-organized, fully documented presentation. He cited both statute and case law. First, he indicated that as a former policemen, Jesse Grund has the same rights to privacy as every other citizen and in addition has special rights. While his records could be turned over to the defense, they could not be made public. This aspect even surprised Judge Strickland, who had never heard of it before.

White went on to discuss materiality and necessity. He pointed out that, in his motion, Baez had provided neither. Baez had asked for "any and all" records without giving the judge a good reason. In the end, Judge Strickland agreed with the lack of materiality in the motion and indicated he needed to study the information concerning the special statute for law enforcement and ex-law enforcement personnel.

Former Deputy Richard Cain's objection has apparently been moved and wasn't addressed at the hearing today.

Jose Baez then stood to reply. He started out by stating he was at a disadvantage because he had to address different issues with different lawyers. (He's lucky all the people subpoenaed didn't have attorneys present!)

Baez began to argue his motion and was immediately interrupted by Judge Strickland who stated that he had no problem with what Baez was asking for, except for the motion being overly broad. He mentioned that Baez had seemed to have worked out the time line issue with the individual lawyers. However, he felt that Baez had not given good reason for wanting the information. The judge said that he could look at the names and figure out why he wanted them, but that he needed Baez to amend the motion to include his reasons.

Baez began his reply to the judge by pointing out that law enforcement had thought the phone records important enough to get them for all but Mr. Kronk. Then, he went on to address the issue of Jesse Grund. He said, "Mr. Grund was, for all intents and purposes a suspect in this case" and had taken a polygraph.

Okay, I blew my stack here. Jesse Grund was just one of Casey's former friends, boyfriends who took a polygraph. Every one of us knows that in such cases, polygraphs are used to exclude people. My goodness, if you go back and listen to one of Cindy Anthony's interviews in August, one of the detectives told her Jesse did not have Caylee! To make matters worse, Baez then went on to toss Amy Huizenga into the same category. Balderdash!

Baez then went on to point out that the records LE had asked for were limited. (I suppose that's because they only asked for what had materiality and necessity as pointed out earlier by Mr. White.) He said he was not on a fishing expedition and His Honor could see the materiality by just looking at the names.

Baez indicated that he didn't want to divulge who he's looking at and why (Mr. Ashton smiled at this.). He was shocked that LE didn't look into Mr. Kronk's phone records. He said, "what I am doing in this case is what law enforcement should have done."

Judge Strickland then said to Baez, "you're kind of straying a bit here, tell me why you want it, not what they didn't do."

Baez went on and on about how doing what the judge wanted him to do "crosses the line" and would essentially broadcast to the prosecution his defense strategy. (Oh yes, Mr. Baez, this is a fishing trip couched in terms of Ms. Casey's Constitutional Rights!)

The judge hauled Baez back to to the issue of what the law requires, materiality!

Baez continued on and on about how he isn't in the business of releasing people's phone numbers and he's even discussed a confidentiality agreement with Kronk. Essentially, Baez was giving his word, he wouldn't turn the "stuff" over to the media! In other words, I want it all and I will only turn over what turns out to be evidence in discovery! Oh, and I'll tell those whose information I'm using as evidence about it so they can file motions then.

Judge Strickland then told Baez that if he could come to agreement with the attorneys, it would be fine with him. He said he was only hearing the motions because of the objections of the attorneys. Baez replied that he had no plans to release or sell any information. (Sell information?)

Drane Burdick spoke to this issue, pointing out that if the material is turned over to her, she is under the obligation to make the information public.

Judge Strickland then introduced a couple of moments of humor into the proceedings when he got Roy Kronk's lawyer confused with Jesse Grund's lawyer. Once the confusion was straightened out, the judge, hoping to short-circuit the discussion, asked Mr. White if he wanted the request made in writing. Mr. White, citing case law again, stated he wanted specificity in everything Baez is asking for and went into great detail about it. Mr. White wanted to know this so HE could decide what is relevant. (I love this guy.)

When Baez attempted to address this, the judge interrupted him to point out that he (the judge), needed to follow the law and that Baez, in his motion had only listed names and not the reasons why.

Baez responded by saying that there wasn't a requirement in the rules to do so! The judge promptly corrected him, saying, "there is a rule about materiality (quote approximate). Baez said that he understood that. (Is there no wonder I'm confused here?)

The judge then asked if Baez had anything to add and Baez went back to the main issue for him. "The pleadings is (sic) opening the door...."

The fact is, Baez originally wanted to address the issue in private. When that didn't work, he submitted his broadly focused motion. He knows very well what is legally required, but he doesn't want anyone to know WHO he is focusing on and why. The trouble is, he never figured out a way to do this legally! There was an article at WFTV on April 21 in which explained how it could have easily been done without going through these hearings:

Sheaffer said Baez could've identified the witnesses' cell phone providers during depositions and then subpoenaed the companies' records directly. Instead, he's asked the judge's permission.

"That will force Baez to tell the court what relevance these phone records may have to the defense," Sheaffer explained.

Sheaffer was right! I highly recommend going to the link I posted and read the article and watch the raw interview. This is where some experience comes in handy.

Back to the hearing! Judge Strickland told Baez his request needed to be finely tailored. Baez
replied that putting the request in writing would only postpone the inevitable. He also indicated the case was moving at a snail's pace. He agreed that he wanted it "done right" and added that he didn't need to put everything in the pleading, just indicate the materiality. (I'm sorry, I don't follow this argument at all.)

At this point, Judge Strickland granted the motion for those who did not have lawyers present: Tony Lazzaro, Cindy Anthony, George Anthony, Lee Anthony, Ricardo Morales, Dominic Casey, James Hoover, and Keith Williams. As for Jesse Grund, Amy Huizenga, and Roy Kronk, Baez will have to go back and rewrite the motion. Richard Cain will be done at a later date. He also mentioned "tweaking" the dates and recommended from June until possibly the present.

Baez indicated that the State is not saying the death was an accident, that it was premeditated murder and that there was a need to have information prior to the in- (he almost said incident here), when Caylee disappeared. He said it's not a situation where there was an incident, and everything moved onward from there.

Eventually, Judge Strickland said that Baez would have to list the numbers he wanted from each and state the materiality. He also made it clear that Baez would not have to state his case strategy when filing the amended motion. He would only require a couple of sentences to determine materiality.

Baez then suggested that if a "special master" could deal with the situation to essentially keep him from revealing too much information the defense didn't want out there. The judge stated that if all the parties agreed, it could be done. He did point out that the court doesn't have special masters and it would be up to Baez to arrange for payment. He gave Baez a few days to try and arrange this.

Strickland again granted the motion for those who did not object and told Baez that he would withhold a denial of the motion without prejudice for one week. If all else were to fail, the judge said he would do so himself in camera. Baez asked if he'd have to pay him!

At this point, I thought the hearing would be over, but no!

Judge Strickland asked Linda Kenney Baden if she wanted to speak to her motion and the amended motion. She got up and introduced Todd Macaluso (See, I said there were a lot of lawyers!) to speak. At this point, my notes tell me he addressed the court using such phrases as "cruel," "inhuman," "illegal," and "unconstitutional"to describe the treatment of Casey the day that her reactions were videotaped. Macaluso also pointed out that there was a plot by OSCO and the jail personnel to videotape Casey. He cited Sgt. Richardson and Lt. Uncer's depositions. He said that the defense had learned more information when they deposed them.

County attorney Giffin objected at this point and asked that the matter be continued until she had the opportunity to read all the pertinent documents. The judge granted the motion and indicated Macaluso could continue his arguments.

As Macaluso started to read quotes from Sgt. Richardson, Giffin objected again, pointing out that she had not had the opportunity to read the depositions. She again requested a continuance so she could be properly prepared to answer. The judge sustained the objection.

Baez then stood and offered her a copy of the deposition. The judge wisely pointed out that giving it to her would not give her the opportunity to read it. Giffin went on to say that the county had no objection to the tape being sealed, she was only concerned about all the allegations contained in the motion. It was her duty to protect county employees.

Drane-Burdick then stood and indicated that the State had no objection to the tape being sealed. She continued by saying that the only party interested in seeing the tape unsealed was the public. She pointed out that the issue would be dealt with in a week. She felt that they were straying into a suppression issue.

The judge then told Macaluso to limit his discussion to why he wanted the tapes sealed and not get into details on the other issues. The judge wanted Macaluso to say why the release of the tapes would harm his client. Macaluso then stated that the tape wouldn't harm his client and didn't prove or disprove anything. He stated that the tape was a violation of her rights to medical privacy. He doesn't want the media to "spit" on the video. He also says he didn't believe the video would ever be used in trial. Finally, he indicated that during the 30-45 minutes Casey was there, her attorney was not permitted to see her.

Drane Burdick spoke for a few moments and suggested the judge view the video prior to the hearing on this issue.

Next up, Linda Kenney Baden told the judge she agreed with his decision to hear arguments on the motions correct (considering it was only filed the day before and the judge, prosecution, and county attorney had not had a chance to even read it). She went on to say that this was now a death penalty case and not an issue of the public's right to know. At this point, the defendant's rights trump the public's right to know. She also indicated that once admitted pro hoc vice, it would be the duty of death penalty qualified attorney Andrea Lyon's responsibility to address the issue. Kenney Baden also stated that there was also the issue of monitoring counsel in meetings with the client involved. She asked the judge if he wanted her to discuss the issue now. Judge Strickland stated it was pointless right now.

After some discussion of scheduling, Andrea Lyon rose to address the court. Drane-Burdick was on her feet immediately, objecting to her speaking, since her documentation for pro hac vice had yet to be filed.

There was more discussion of scheduling at the bench. While we waited, Attorney Jose Garcia and Casey had time to chat.

As the bench conference ended, so did the hearing. At this point, we should hear next week whether or not the tape will be released.

Video of the hearing:

Part 1
Part 2
Part 3

Casey Anthony: January 30 Hearing

Update!

Judge Stan Strickland has ruled against the defense's motion to obtain material from TES. In the one page decision, stated that

The Court does not have jurisdiction to order a subpoena duces tecum as requested. The defense must avail itself of the Uniform Law to Secure the Attendance of Witnesses from Within or Without a State in Criminal Proceedings to accomplish the this task. This would require the defense to show that the witness is material, and that has not been done in the instant pleading...

Judge Strickland also stated that the defense provided insufficient information to show that TES acted as an agent of the state.


The hearing today was short and to the point! To quote Ron Kuby, who kindly re-broadcast portions of the the hearing on InSession, Judge Strickland "cut through the BS." In just under an hour, he listened to the motions and either postponed rulings or ruled quickly with a minimum of argument.

Casey Anthony appeared in court in what I would call her "paralegal look." Jean Casarez was sitting just behind her and described her as wearing a blue jacket over her jail scrub pants. I noted that her hair was freshly washed and tied back on her head. She spent the majority of the time taking notes on a legal pad and at one point, beamed one of her famous smiles at her attorney, Jose Baez. She also chatted with Linda Kenney-Baden who was also present for the hearing.

The first motion to be addressed was Motion to Inspect the Crime Scene. Baez stated that he had attempted to contact the owner of the property to no avail. The owner's mother had called him, denying him access. The judge granted the motion, permitting the defense experts to examine the scene.

Jose Baez spoke briefly on the matter of information they want from Texas Equusearch. I couldn't quite follow his argument, but my friend donchais remarked that he was basically asking for information from the searchers as to "what they found AND didn't find...made my head spin."

Mark NeJame, representing TES put forward the same arguments he mentioned in his motion. He said that the motion was not made in the proper way. He explained that TES was not a material witness in the case and therefore there was no subpoena to send to Texas. He also stated that it, "baffles logic that those going out to find the remains would NOT report finding a child." He ended his comments by stating to Baez that, "your request is flawed."

Baez responded by stating that TES had been working with authorities and was paid by the authorities who were at the various search locations. He pointed out that NeJame's motion didn't address that particular issue. I noticed that Baez mentioned they were "paid." That pay was a mere $5000, a donation, actually. He didn't mention that the search has literally broken TES financially!

Baez requested that the judge issue a subpoena and that he would take it to Texas. He also pointed out that TES had opened an office in Orlando and was doing business in Texas.

Judge Strickland indicated that he would take the arguments under advisement and that both sides could submit further case law to him before he made a decision on the motion. He stated that he will rule on it later today. The judge also mentioned that Baez' term "doing business" may not be appropriate.

NeJame then addressed the fact that Baez hadn't mentioned that his contention that TES is an "arm" of the state of FL is not even in the pleadings. He then went on to mention the financial provisions in his motions as well as the chilling effect the granting of this motion would have on the volunteer searchers.

Baez' response was that NeJame had been following the case and was aware that TES "could" be an agent of the state. He then indicated that he has a bill stating that some of the tips were not in conformity with what the defense had asked for.

The judge reiterated that he will rule on the motion today.

Mark NeJame commented that the defense was aware that he was representing TES and sidestepped contacting him in the matter and went to TES directly.

The judge said that he was off topic and that he will rule on the motion today.

Baez next brought up the fact that Mark NeJame had represented the Anthonys and the judge told him to "file a motion" about it. Baez indicated he wouldn't do that.

The judgesaid he would rule on the motion today.

The motion to strike the defense witness list was moot since they have submitted a new one. It will be interesting to see it when it is released to the public.

Linda Kenney-Baden was next up at bat. She argued the defense motion to recuse the prosecution attorneys. She spoke at her usual fast pace, summarizing her motion to the judge. She mentioned a Mr. Chinais, who is Baez' attorney in this matter and listed his bona fides, among which was the fact that he, at one time, chaired the Florida Bar Ethics Committee. She indicated that he spoke to a Mr. Marvin who confirmed for her that "someone" from the State's Attorney's office had sent the complaint.

She informed Judge Strickland that it was his responsibility to launch his own investigation into the issue.

Next, she read the quote from Jose Baez's press conference after the infamous Todd Black press release which attacked Lawson Lamar. She pointed out that Baez had said, "I'm not going to throw out any accusations... it wasn't me that said..."

She again informed Judge Strickland that he needs to investigate this for himself and find out what the person's motivation was.

At that point, the judge gave her 30 seconds to finish!

State's Attorney Linda Drane Burdick requested that the judge strike the motion, telling him that the assertions from the media are double, triple, hearsay. She pointed out that Ms. Baden's arguments mention a person not mentioned in the pleadings. In addition, the motion did not address HOW the State of Florida, through the filing, had harmed Ms. Anthony.

Drane Burdick said that if it's inconvenient to Mr. Baez, embarrassing, he can get a lawyer.

She summed up the prosecution position by stating that if some person in the office filed a complaint, it wasn't any member of the prosecution team and that the motion had no factual or legal support.

Baden spoke again briefly, saying that the judge has to find that out for himself.

Judge Strickland ended the debate by denying the motion. He indicated that, based on what he has heard, is a Florida Bar matter and that the factual base is thin.

Clarifying the matter, Jean Casarez mention on In Session that she had checked with the Bar Association and learned that no complaint had been filed. Someone from the State's Attorney's Office had merely faxed the articles to them and they opened their own investigation.

The remainder of the hearing concerned schedueling a trial date. The defense mentioned that there was a "mountain" of discovery that he needed to go through. The prosecution stated that it was likely the trial would not take place until later in the year.

Judge Strickland said he would set another hearing within the next 60-90 days. He also mentioned that a motion for change of venue had not been filed. Drane Burdick pointed out one may not be needed if the trial doesn't begin until later in the year. The judge said that Baez could file papers in the meantime if he so desired.

As a finale to the hearing, Bradley Conway, the Anthony family attorney waived the Anthonys' privilege in order to expedite the discovery process. He said that they love Casey and wants things to move along.

Anthony Emergency Hearing

Ok, yet another waste of taxpayer money and the court’s time!

Ugh, Baden is attending telephonically!

Good lord, Baez does whine!

JB: Want schematic drawings…

LKB phone-in atty.

Baden: Autopsy

Judge: Second autopsy moot.

JB: Crime scene photos, etc.

Where we were at the last hearing there was an attempt by both parties to work out crime scene. They said defense could hire off-duty officers to help them go through the scene themselves.

Were to be given 2-3 hour notice

Next day - told they would be finished the NEXT day (13th) We flew in the experts or had them on stand-by.

Important to get to it before media.

Now, not allowed to hire off-duty officers.

Following day... going through the "dance" every single day. LE not sure when they will be done. No longer crime scene, excavation site.

Exhibit A: crime scene tech. kneeling next to numerous bushes and trees.

Exhibit B: ME walking behind.... more trees & debris, crime scene techs. carrying away possible loads of soil.

Don't want to prohibit them from doing their job but they have first dibs on the scene after LE.

They would like to have the ability to see the scene as it was. It's not the same now!

Submits an article co-written by Henry Lee laying out importance of forensic botany. What can be learned by looking at plant life?

Submitted sworn affidavit by etymologist... it will be difficult to get into.

Press and other civilians will make the situation worse!

Anticipates the State will say it's an investigation and we can't turn the photos over to defense.

Baez needs to just shut up and let them conclude their investigation! Helloooo, Jose - this is how it normally gets done!

Jose says there is a time constraint and it's their duty to preserve evidence. There is a good faith basis to understand that this evidence needs to be preserved.

He asked Det. Allen if he could have photos as soon as they are done.

Allen said he could have them through discovery.

Only the defense is taking this seriously.

It's up to the courts to preserve evidence so as not to impede a fair trial.

County: Photographs

As more evidence is found, it has stretched out the investigation. It is not an excavation, it's a crime scene. It is still an active crime scene. It will change when body identified and LE is finished with the crime scene.

They have the ability to pick and choose photographs to give to Baez. They will not give picture of skull until body Identified. They will put markers into the ground.

It is at Orange County's discretion.

JB: He thinks they're getting somewhere. He'll take what they've offered and is willing to stipulate to dissemination of the photographs.

He says they can't be released under the Dale Ernhardt Law.

He makes every assurance he will not release them to any third party.

He feels that LE sometimes misses things and it's the defense's job to find what they miss.

Judge: release of photos and autopsy photos an issue for another day.

He's asking for them ahead of discovery rules.

Baden (on the phone)

Some Maceration of bones at Quantico. What bones have been shipped if any? Any possibility that they be macerated? Any forensic testing changes remains anyway.

It's hard to hear her, but they want the ME to request information from FBI about what remains they have and if bones will be macerated (de-fleshed).

Judge: point is moot until body ID's

It is a continuing request.

Teehee! Strickland ain't buying it! Just how much of the court's time and taxpayer money is Baez going to be allowed to waste??????

Asst. Cty. Atty. Guthrie:

A minimal amount of material has been sent to Quantico for ID only.

Dr. Garavaglia says there has been no maceration yet. 3'' of bone will be consumed for testing, including toxicology.

Dr. G. has a right and an obligation to do her examination correctly. She would not do anything untoward to the remains.

When it is complete, the remains will be turned over to next of kin and their experts.

She does not feel she wants to be observed.

Baden - pictures and x-rays of original autopsy

Judge: He read the motions and he understands some of what defense is requesting. He can't do what he asks to do.

He was hoping LE could give a definite time but now realizes it can't be done.

He can't tell the ME to tell FBI what to do.

If LE doesn't do complete investigation, defense would say it is a shoddy job.

He's asking the court to assist him, and he CAN'T ASSIST HIM IN A MURDER INVESTIGATION!

LE is entitled to do what they have to do.

No requirement to leave crime scene in pristine condition.

Motions DENIED!

He will receive material through usual discovery.

Baez: Would like the photos the county has as soon as the crime scene is cleared.

County Atty: Photographers are busy at the scene and she won't pull them off the scene.

Judge: Unusual situation since the body was found after defendant charged. However, usual discovery procedures will be followed.

ritanita: Wowzers! Did we call those results or not. As of now County/State 100% = Baez/Baden 0%.

ritanita provided the transcription – great job – I provided the sarcastic color commentary!

The Case Against Casey Anthony, An Editorial by ritanita

Update!

Beth Karas has informed T&T that there was a communication error at In Sessions. Lee Anthony was not present at the hearing on December 11th. Thank you Beth. Sprocket
Please, A Little Respect for the Dead

I think that many readers here have been in a situation where a relative has died. There is a respectful funeral and polite reception. Then, the grieving relatives hurry over to the house of the deceased and, like a pack of vultures, pick the place clean of items of "sentimental" value.

That's how I feel about this time in the Casey Anthony case. It's a terrible time. The remains of a small child have been found a mere forty second drive from the Anthony residence on Hope Springs Drive. Those of us who have followed the case and have become emotionally involved in sweet Caylee's disappearance are waiting for a positive identification of the remains. We feel such mixed emotions about the discovery. We hope it is not Caylee and that somehow she is alive and well. We know realistically that it probably is Caylee. We hope that is her so that she will finally have a proper burial. We want to see the prosecution up the ante in their case against her mother.

This has been such a bizarre case and the press has been all over it from the beginning. Casey's parents, George and Cindy, have done their best to support their daughter by splashing themselves all over the news proclaiming Caylee to be alive and that their "investigators" are busy all over the country hunting down supposed "Caylee sightings."

George and Cindy Anthony have up until today taken their new attorney's advice and avoided the media. However, they and Kid Finders have announced a press conference for tonight at 7:30 PM.

The media, on the other hand, has descended on the house and reporters wait in front to interview whoever approaches. They are camped at the crime scene around the corner watching as the OCSD and FBI painstakingly sift through the entire scene for the tiniest bone, the smallest clue.

On one hand, I wish the press would decamp and let law enforcement do it's job in peace. On the other, it is comforting to me to know what is happening.

What bothers me the most right now is the new defense "Dream Team" and their current shenanigans. In the emergency court hearing on Friday, Judge Stan Strickland supported the prosecution's arguments that new Team Casey forensic pathologist, Dr. Werner Spitz not be allowed to attend the autopsy since the remains have not been positively identified. In an interview, Dr. Spitz proclaimed that this is the first time he has not been allowed to observe an autopsy. Sorry, Dr. Spitz, the judge was only following the law.

Last night, the entire team showed up at the crime scene and stood around for a few hours doing interviews and whining about not being allowed inside the tape to observe the processing of the site. Again, this team wants to get to the evidence before it is completely processed to insure that it is done correctly. They obviously think that the OCSD and the FBI don't know what they are doing.

The fact is, it is entirely normal and proper for law enforcement to process a crime scene and then turn it over to the defense. Dr. Henry Lee felt that he couldn't do a proper investigation because the scene will not be the same as when the remains were discovered.

Sorry, Dr. Lee! Don't you remember the Phil Spector case? You were able to go into the crime scene only after it was processed by law enforcement. You found some evidence and somehow lost it.

Of course, that was an indoor crime scene. In this case, the crime scene is a formerly flooded wetland area. To do a thorough job, the investigators have to sift through every inch of the scene to locate the tiniest of bones, the smallest clue. That is the nature of crime scene investigation. I am sure that, if the investigators were not to do the most thorough job possible, the defense would appear at trial and blast the OCSD and FBI for not doing a proper job! The defense team is making this all a lose-lose situation!

This is the point where I compare "Team Casey" to a pack of vultures. In my opinion, they are standing at the scene, the last relatives to get to the scene and have lost the "best pickings."

Please, "Team Casey," stay away until the work by law enforcement is done. Have respect for the little child whose body was unceremoniously dumped there in a garbage bag and duct tape over her face. That area is sacred ground. It is a place which should be treated with respect for the dead child.

Videos:

Jose Baez and his forensics team
Baez Looking For Answers
Linda Kenny Baden, Jose Baez

News Links:

CNN Find Caylee Blog
Fox35

Anthony Emergency Hearing

In yet another waste of the court’s time, the hearing was over rather quickly.

Linda Kenny Baden will cover the forensics.

Jose lays out his argument. They believe that it would be important the court address their ability to observe "alleged" crime scene and forensic testing.

Pros: his motion doesn't have crime scene

Judge: not going to mention crime scene

LKB: Missing body of child found and still in possession of ME. They want either/or:

Have somebody observe autopsy for defense:

getting Dr. Kathy Reichs (sp) forensic anthropologist from Montreal

To observe, not to interfere, as well as Dr. Werner Spitz on call to observe the autopsy

(aaaaccccckkkkk)

Pros: Me required to maintain specimens, seize and retain info relating to ID and COD.

ME has COMPLETE CONTROL, FL laws are very clear.

Issue is the body is unidentified.

The ME needs to have the dignity and integrity of their office preserved. Should not make a circus of autopsy. ME office must preserve all evidence.

Judge: Second review of the body?

Long and short: Laws are designed to preserve evidence.

OCSO ATTY: FBI will do ID. Ongoing investigation, no identity. After ID, kicks over to States attorney.

Pros: No due process right to discovery in FL law that would allow this.

Until body determined to be Caylee, defense has no right to observe testing of any evidence.

Confidentiality of videos, photos, etc. of autopsies. Public policy... autopsies have higher level of respect than any other examinations.

Not make them public record.

Respect for dead carries over into this case. Doesn't want a defense expert on a national news show describing this child's remains. Cites Henry Lee doing so after examining Casey’s car.

LKB: Crime scene: they expect to have H. Lee to come in, after State is finished. Want it held for Dr. Lee.

Also, Dr. Timothy Huntington, forensic entomologist.

If not observe in situ, to allow them to come in after autopsy to review the body

no videotapes to be taken

want to see x-rays now, not later

Pros. objects... no motion filed yet

LKB - will file a motion

LKB is told to limit her arguments to autopsy

LKB: Observe first-hand/do a review immediately after

OC Atty: this issue is not ripe, defense has no standing, remains not ID'd yet. Speculation, anticipation, but no scientific response.

Judge asks if it would be too late.

She says no. ME's responsibility to ID body FIRST.

No testimony presented that a complete and adequate examination can't be done after the autopsy.

Calls observation egregious. "Strangers" present for the autopsy of a young child.

LKB said she wanted her experts to suggest things... that’s interference!

Baden replies: Wants best information for her client.

Judge: Has county said there has been no tentative ID?

LKB: Baez was told child likely Caylee.

(Size and hair color match)

Do they have to wait for FINAL ID?

Asking not to desecrate any remains... observe in situ

Pictures won't be as good.

County: no tentative ID

Judge: Body of the motion, para. 5. If body id's as Caylee...

Request DENIED! No tentative ID.

Court may reexamine in terms of second review of body after ID and autopsy.

Would interfere w/ME and those w/statutory duty

After ID, ME will notify whoever needs to be notified.

DEFINITIVE ID! Not tentative.

Pros: Can't give date. FBI has that.

LKB says that nobody can get in FBI labs.

They are going to hold up the body 2-3 weeks???

Pros: They will be notified after definitive ID.

LKB's not HAPPY CAMPER!!!

Jose speaks: more emergency issues

These forensic items have passed a certain time and time is of the essence, wants permission for a second autopsy via written motion.

Crime scene: pros has no problem turning over crime scene (shades of Spector)

Judge wants time frame.

"Total guess"

Judge: ASAP

By agreement of the parties (however rare they are - judge)

CNN

Thanks ritanita!

Trial Notes, 5-29-07

I get out of the house way late, and decide to drive to the North Hollywood Red Line station to catch the train. I make great driving time, however, I can't find a parking spot in the lot. The only spaces that are available are for permit parking. Thankfully, a woman stopped me from parking in one of these spaces or I'd have gotten a ticket. I take a chance and park on the street. I make the train I normally would have made to reach downtown by 9:05 am.

I forgot to grab the extra large tote I had packed with a cushion for court. I at least remembered to put a new book in my bag, since I finished my last book on surviving dangerous situations. I will have something to read to pass the time.

9:10 am. I see Dominick and Ciaran sitting together. Two trial watching men (Richard and Ron) who have been attending quite a bit of the trial, say hello to Dominick. Finally, I get into the courtroom at 9:30 am. Lana's family hasn't arrived, and I don't think they will. Dr. Pena, the medical examiner is expected to testify today. I see that Alan Jackson has a whole stack of photos in his hand. Steven says, "it will be Kenney Baden's day today. This is where she earns her air fare."

The bailiff comes over to talk to the Court TV camera operators to tell then, "Fox 11 is on the phone. Fox is not getting a picture." One of the men replies, "It's an optical issue and we have someone working on it." 9:35 am. No judge, no jury. Ah! Now they're called. The defense informs the judge that, "Dr. Spitz and Dr. DiMaio will be here assisting us." Rosen brings up a point about Greg Diamond. A lengthy motion was filed by the defense this morning. Alan Jackson hasn't had a chance to review it. It has to do with two huge notebooks sent to him by Alan Jackson that supposedly he (the medical examiner?) hasn't looked at. The huge binders are about the psychological aspects of the victim. Alan Jackson andRosen temporarily resolve the issue.

Dr. Pena enters the courtroom. Dr's Spitz and DiMiao sit over on right, behind the defense area of the courtroom. Dr. Pena takes the oath. Alan Jackson conducts the direct examination. Louis Pena, forensic pathologist. Dr. Pena goes over what a forensic pathologist does. They determine "Cause of Death" and "Manner of Death." Dr. Pena has a medical degree in pathology. He did his residency inLos Angeles and in West Los Angeles. He testifies that he's board certified in pathology. He's performed over 3,300 autopsies. He's testified approximately 260 times in court.

Q: Is there a difference between "Cause of Death" and "Manner of Death?" (These are often abbreviated as COD and MOD.)

A: Cause of Death is the specific injury. (Dr. Pena gives examples.) If the Manner of Death can not be determined through the autopsy, then I need input. I will investigate from information provided. It's a team effort, putting the information together. Hopefully, from that I can then decide if the death is from natural causes, an accident, a homicide or a suicide.

Dr. Pena testifies that Ms. Clarkson's death is assigned a case number by the medical examiner's office. Coroner's case #2003-00937. Dr. Pena describes how cases are assigned a unique number, and no two cases have the same number. Since the decedent was not known, Dr. Pena went to the death scene around 5:00 pm on Monday afternoon. Dr. Pena explains that when he does go to a death scene, he does tend to remember the circumstances much better. Looking at the body, at the scene, helped him to come to a conclusion about the case.

Dr. Pena discussed with with Jamie Linetmoot, how to best preserve the clothing from purging from Ms. Clarkson's mouth and nose. Dr. Pena states that Ms. Clarkson's head is wrapped in a sheet/towel for transport. When Ms. Clarkson was placed on the examination table, she purged onto the table. Blood and tissue contaminated the right side of Ms. Clarkson's jacket.

Dr. Pena testifies to all the individuals who observed the autopsy. Tomlin, Forneya, Dr. Baden, Barlian Nelson, Jamie Lintemoot, another gentleman and Dr. Sherry. (sp? on the names) Dr. Pena states that it was a courtesy to Dr. Baden for him to be there.

Q: Is it normal for investigators to be there at autopsy?
A: At a homicide, yes, it is.

More photos, close ups of Lana's head are put on the overhead screen. There are three photos. A: As she arrived at the medical examiner's office. B: Photo of Ms. Clarkson after she had been washed off. C: After autopsy. The dentist came down and examined the two fractured upper front teeth. (The look like they are totally gone in the photo.)

Q: Did you have any findings regarding any wounds?
A: Do you want me to start with the head wound?

Dr. Pena states the bullet nicked the top part of the tongue. The bullet hit C1 & C2 and tore apart the spinal cord. The spinal cord was completely severed. Pena shows the jury on himself the trajectory of the bullet. The bullet fractured the base of the skull, hit the dura and ruptured the dura. The bullet lodged into the occiput bone of the skull. (This bone is at the base of the skull.) Dr Pena says, "A gun shot (GS) wound to the head and neck that cause her to die immediately." Up on the screen is an ME's office form with a diagram of the head; it's a side view, showing the trajectory of the bullet. The bullet ended up at the back of the head, still inside the skull. When hitting any hard bone, bullets can change direction. Dr. Pena states that the bullet could have changed direction. The bullet first grazed the top of the tongue. He goes onto to describe a specific type of injury to the very back of the tongue, but I can't read my note to get the correct word. Dr. Pena describes it. "Think of it, like a star burst. It sort of splits the flesh." Dr. Pena goes over more of the descriptions on the ME documentation form #24, where all the tongue injuries are described in detail.

(As I transcribe my notes here, I search my Webster's Medical Dictionary for this word that I can't tell exactly how it's spelled. I think I've found it. Sulcate (sul'kat). Grooved; furrowed; marked by a sulcus or sulci.)

Dr. Pena testifies that sulcate appears in the middle of the tongue. There are bruises by the back of the tongue. These are superficial. There is a bruise on the left side of the tongue. Dr. Pena says that the back of the tongue bruises could be from the bullet hitting the spinal column.

Q: What may have caused the bruise on the left?
A: I sought out opinions from my colleagues, and asked them to review the file.

In Dr. Pena's opinion, the bruise is consistent with a blunt force trauma. That bruise on the left side of the tongue did not occur from the bullet. It is his opinion that it occurred prior to Ms.Clarkson's death. He can't state when it occurred, only that it is recent, and premortem.

The jurors appear transfixed. Some lean in to listen to Dr. Pena. Dr. Pena then goes into explaining "sooting" and "stippling," and that it is burned and unburned powder hitting the skin. The difference is in how far away the end of the gun is from skin/tissue. Dr. Pena identified "psudostippling inside the oral mucosa. The weapon recoiled and hit her two teeth. The inter oral marks are due to those porcelain crowns breaking and shattering."

Q: Is it common for a bullet to shed or split when it hits bone?
A: Yes.

It's now that Alan Jackson goes through the demonstration on the screen, showing that, although the trajectory of the bullet appears to be upwards and toward the back of her skull, this does not tell us what position Ms. Clarkson's neck could have been in. It could have been tilted back. It's very clear from his demonstration up on the screen, that even though the bullet trajectory is fixed from where it exited the gun to where the bullet lodged, there is no way to know what position her head and body were in. The bullet trajectory is slightly upward, towards the back of the skull. But that does not mean that Ms. Clarkson's head was in the upright position when she was killed.

Dr. Pena testifies that Ms. Clarkson's death was immediate. She would have been immediately unconscious. Her body would have gone limp immediately. Dr. Pena now moves on to other injuries he found on Ms.Clarkson's body. There are bruises on the edge of the hand/wrists. There are bruises on either side of the left hand/wrist area, and and another bruise high up on the left forearm.

The court takes it's morning recess, and I get up to stretch my legs and back out.

Back on the record, Beth Karas enters the courtroom. Looking over at the jury, Jurors #8 and #9 joke. I see Jurors # 5 and #6 whisper. Alan Jackson is going over the wrist bruising again with Dr. Pena, who states he looked at these bruises under a microscope. Dr. Pena states that these bruises appeared to be about the same age . In Dr. Pena's opinion, they were recent to her time of death. There was no evidence of inflammation in these bruises. Dr. Pena states that based on the location of the wrist bruises and their age, they are consistent with someone grabbing Ms. Clarkson's wrists. Dr. Pena states he looked at Ms. Clarkson's bruises at the death scene. New images are put up on the overhead screen. These same images are handed to the jurors to look at. They are of Lana's hands at the scene.

Dr. Pena testifies that Steve Dowell did a GSR test for the top of the tongue and from the oral mucosa area, just inside the mouth. He also tested the hands and forearms for GSR. Dr. Pena states that he took blood from Ms. Clarkson's heart and from her femoral artery. (The femoral artery is located in the thigh.) He also took a vial of blood for DNA studies. The blood would be for toxicology studies and for blood alcohol content (BAC) analysis. The draw from the femoral artery is considered more accurate for BAC. The femoral BAC was .12. The heart BAC was .14. Normally, they do a screen that covers illegal drugs, and Dr. Pena also did a screen for "bases," which cover psychological drugs.

There was an over the counter medication in her system: Aleve. There was Vicodin. Both of these were in the low therapeutic ranges of .03-.07. There was no indication of higher levels (above .07) .

Q: Were you able to make a "Cause of Death" determination?
A: Yes. Gun shot wound to head and neck.
Q: Could you make a determination as to "manner of death" just by the autopsy?

A: No, I could not. (snip) The manner of death is homicide. (snip) It was not a typical scene for a suicide. Especially when it was (in the home of ) someone they had never met before. There are some exceptions to that, for example, suicide by cop. I've never had a case where someone just met someone and goes to their home and never been there before and just shoots themselves.

How would she have known that the gun was there in that drawer? I factored in the purse still on the shoulder. ...  There was no evidence to substantiate depression. No diagnosis from a psychotherapist in her medical records. She was taking Paxil and Elavil but these were prescribed by a neurologist for a chronic problem with headaches. The Elavil she tried for a month. The Paxil works in the brain chemistry to help affect the blood vessels and work on headaches. (snip) She had no history of prior idealation or suicide attempts. She had all the medication in the world to commit suicide but she used them as prescribed. (snip) She did not possess or own a firearm.

Q: Based on everything, taking everything into consideration, based on the totality of the circumstances, what is the manner of death?
A: This is a homicide.

And direct examination ends. There is a bit of a hearing now, outside the jury's presence. Wow! It's not Linda Kenney Baden. It's going to be Chris Plourd who does the cross. The Judge and the attorneys banter back and forth a bit here, using "farm analogies," and the phrase, "cow out of the barn" is used. The Judge asks, "Didn't anyone grow up in the city?" Everyone laughs. The arguments continue as to what Plourd can cross Pena on. The Judge finally says that it will be on a "question by question basis, as to what they can ask. They cannot refer directly to inadmissible evidence. They cannot state precisely what might have been said." This is all referring to Spector's self serving statements that Dr. Pena was told, and used to come to his conclusion as to MOD.

Plourd begins his cross of Dr. Pena. He asks Dr. Pena what his specialty is in pathology. Dr. Pena says it's the heart. He's written some articles on it. Plourd holds up a textbook by Spitz and another one by someone else. Dr. Pena says that yes, he has referred to these books, but he also takes into account his experience of those 3,300 autopsies, and what he's seen in the field.

The lunch recess is called, and cross stops for now. Down in the first floor cafeteria, I call home and find out my husband is not feeling well. He injured his ribs on a job a few weeks ago, and they are still bothering him. I take off from court and go home in the hopes that I can work on him and make him feel a bit more comfortable.

Update:
One of the things I just remembered from this day. When Plourd asks Dr. Pena about Dr. Spitz's book and Dr. DiMaio, Dr. Pena smiled and waved to them from the witness stand.

The back finally gives out

UPDATED
I had some errands I needed to get done so I did not go to court today. While picking up a heavy box off my patio slated for The Goodwill, I lifted with my back instead of using my legs. I heard (and felt) a noticeable "pop." Fearing I had totally ruined my low back for weeks to come, I tried to stretch it out. Yep. Seriously strained; no more court for me this week. I've made an appointment with my chiropractor and hopefully he can get me back in shape by next Monday or Tuesday. It's not easy sitting, and I'll probably take something for the pain before I got to bed, but I will try to put up some more notes tomorrow afternoon.

Posters on Court TV have been talking about Bruce Cutler, every since Peter Y. Hong's article in the LA Times came out this morning. (I don't know how long that link to the story will be good.)

Especially troubling to some people was this comment:

"He's my soul mate," Cutler says of the music producer. "We get one another."

That comment raises some very interesting questions about Cutler, and the individuals he finds a personal connection with.

There's no question that Bruce Cutler is a very theatrical person, and he is a large (although muzzled) presence in the courtroom. I'm reminded of a pit bull, with his huge barrel chest and nonexistent neck. I sometimes think he's about to explode, but the only thing confining him are his perfectly tailored suits.

Dominick Dunne, who actually likes Cutler, caught a ride from him when his limo failed to pick him up one day after court. Sitting in the back of the limousine with Cutler, with their heads resting against the back of the seat, Mr. Dunne said he felt like he was going to see the Don himself.

Yesterday, I had a discussion with another trial watcher about the DNA found on the bullets in the murder weapon. If you remember, Linda Kenney Baden in her opening statement, specifically said that Lana's DNA was found on the bottom of the cartridges. Yet, the criminalist, Steve Renteria, specifically testified he only swabbed the bullet's themselves, and not the cartridges. The trial watcher felt that Linda Kenney Baden would not make such a claim in her OS, if it wasn't true, and felt that the defense must have performed their own DNA testing on the bullets. I feel the defense did not test the bullets, but to know for sure, we'll have to wait until the defense puts on it's case in chief.

Jurors #7, 8, & 9 are all on their second notebook. Yesterday, at times I observed juror #5, a well dressed black woman, turn her head to look at Plourd while he asked a question, then turn her head back to the witness when they answered. Back and forth it went like that for some time. It's very hard to read this jury. (It's not like I'm any sort of jury expert anyway. This is only the second trial I've had the opportunity to attend.) I rarely see any facial expressions among the group. There are a few of the male jurors who often sit with their arms folded across their chests, and a few of the group who occasionally take a glance out at the gallery, as the gallery looks back at them.

UPDATE: 6-13-07 10:40 am
I was pretty tired last night, and forgot to mention a little gallery drama. There is this one trial watcher who has been there off and on. I’ll call this person W. W is part of the public and is not part of the regular press. Monday, during the morning break, Ciaran McEvoy and Dominick left their seats to step outside the courtroom. During that time, W moved from their seat in the third row and moved up to the second row to sit where Ciaran was sitting. W was then overheard to have said when they sat down, “You snooze, you lose.”

When I heard (later in the day) that W said this, I was flabbergasted. There is a hierarchy in the courtroom. The accredited press gets to sit exactly where they want, and they usually have their favorite spots. The general public is usually told by the court’s public liaison where to sit. I am lucky that Steven saves a spot for me in the second row. When Ciaran and Dominick came back from break, Steven and myself had to scoot down a bit to make room for them. No way in the world would I have done something like this. I give the reporters in the room the respect they deserve, and can’t imagine trying to overtake someone else’s spot.

In the afternoon session, W’s cell phone went off. The bailiff came over, and W was quickly ejected from the courtroom. At the end of court as I exited the courtroom, there was W waiting outside, hopping mad. W was talking to someone else, saying something about giving the bailiff (and I paraphrase), ”...a piece of their mind...” As I was walking away I was thinking, Leave your cell phone on, you lose.

Trial Notes, 5-23-07

It’s almost 9:15 am. There is not one recognizable soul in the hallway. So, I'm wondering if they started early. Inside the courtroom, I only see Court TV reporters Harriet Ryan and another whose name I don't know. The defense attorneys are here, but not the prosecution. Another case is having a hearing in Fidler’s court. Slowly, some reporters start to show up. Steve Dunleavy, Steven from LA Weekly, and David K. Li. Russ arrives with Alan P. from the court’s public relations office. It’s 9:20, and the courtroom is virtually empty. Lana’s mother, sister and attorney arrive. Plourd, Rosen and Linda Kenney Baden are here. Everyone is waiting to see if Robert Shapiro shows up today and will be put on the stand. David K. Li asks if Linda Kenney Baden’s name is written with a hyphen or without a hyphen. Alan says, “I’m the Public Information Officer. I can provide that.” It’s determined there is no hyphen in her last name.

Brunon arrives. I’m wondering if the prosecutors are still with Shapiro. Everyone is expecting him. Steve Dunleavy, the famous New York Post reporter is admiring the shine on David K. Li’s shoes. “That’s one hell-of-a shine,” he says. “I can see my face in it.” Patrick Dixon finally enters the courtroom. The LA Times reporter Peter Y. Hong arrives as well as the prosecutor’s clerk who controls all their photo and document exhibits on the Elmo.

9:30 am.
No Alan Jackson. No Judge. Sara Caplan arrives. The tall black haired attorney for Lana’s family arrives. Linda Deutch finally slips into the courtroom. Russ, Steve Dunleavy, Steve Mikulan and another reporter all kvetch a bit. Rosen and LKB are in deep conversation. A gentleman I’ve seen before chats with the attorneys on both sides and now is chatting with LKB.

The prosecutions case file (it’s transported into court each day on a rolling cart, usually by Ed) finally gets here, and Ed goes through a few items. Sara Caplan and Linda Deutch chat a bit now. Cutler arrives along with the young bald Asian prosecutor we saw a few days ago. Ah, the gray suited man with stark white hair is Sara Caplan’s attorney. The judge is finally on the bench.

The defense is trying to get some sort of discovery issues. They are stating that the prosecution has stuff they’ve not received. Now I have some notes that I am having a hard time deciphering.

After discussing how we should do this, asked his boss Doyle to speak with Captain Kyle Jackson; to the Robbery Homicide Division and what they needed and how to proceed. Maybe I can figure this out later.

The defense is now asking for anything the prosecution has from Bill Pavelic. Something about an e-mail from Pavelic to an “E. Wiley.” And that’s it.

The defense makes a motion to object to the entire proceedings. The Judge responds that his role is to safeguard the process, to ensure that nothing improper occurs. The judge cites a case to support his ruling. Jackson gets Caplan kicked from the courtroom for a moment. The judge reads the ruling. “That’s exactly what I’m doing. I’m taking action.”

Sara Caplan takes the stand again. Her attorney sits in the jury box, and Rosen is asking the questions. She states she had worked on cases with Dr. Lee before. From what she recalls, about three or four times. “It didn’t look like what was in those vials.” Now, with the way Rosen is asking the questions, he’s implying that the white particles on the floor... trying to imply that the white particles might be the falling down ceiling.

Now Alan Jackson asks her a question.

A: The object I saw on the ground was not cotton swabs.

Then the judge says he has some questions for Ms. Caplan. The judge is looking over a transcript of her prior testimony and reads it back to her.

Q: Why are you changing your testimony? Did you see Henry Lee pick something up and put it in a vial?

A: Yes.

I think there is one more question or two and then Alan Jackson gets up to present arguments to their position. One of his most memorable statements is, “Is Dr. Lee lying or is he incompetent? Which is it?”

When Alan Jackson finishes, Chris Plourd gets up to argue the defense position. Plourd argues about the number of criminalist at the crime scene. That “piece” definitely not there when those criminalists were there. It was not Sara Caplan’s responsibility to observe or supervise Dr. Lee. “There’s no evidence that Sara Caplan watched Dr. Lee’s testimony on TV. They (the prosecution) clearly lost something. There’s no evidence that the defense lost anything.” Plourd keeps using the phrase over and over again, “Dr. Lee testified to....” He tried to say there’s no clear evidence something was picked up. Then Brunon gets up to speak. “From a legal point of view, the whole issue has been speculative,” he says. “Mr. Jackson says his case is damaged. We ask, in what way?” Brunon says, “Suppose Dr. Lee did pick something up and do lose it. Again, how does that specifically hurt their case?”

Patrick Dixon jumps up, and he appears really upset in his tone. “It goes right to the heart of this case your honor!”

The judge is ready to rule. The complete transcript of that ruling can be found here. And for those who missed it, Judge Fidler ruled that Dr. Henry Lee was not credible, and that Sara Caplan's testimony was the most credible. He also states that the people can call any witnesses who testified at this hearing to impeach the testimony of Dr. Lee.

It’s 1:05 pm. Lunch is almost over. Spector and his wife and bodyguards arrive and go into the courtroom. They immediately exit the courtroom, and head down towards the other end of the hallway. I’ve heard that the court has given them a room that they can gather in to conference. There is a group of six new trial watchers waiting together in the hall. At first, I thought they were here for another trial, but after seeing them speak to one of the court public liaison's staff, I’m pretty sure it’s a good bet these individuals are part of some sort of production company. I can just tell by the way they look and are interacting with each other. Besides, why would a group of people coming down to court, contact the court’s public liaison office? Cutler arrives and enters the courtroom.

There’s a mass of people waiting butt not so many that I won’t get in. My thought is more about getting my same bench seat. A deputy approaches who is packing double heat. Steven says, “Two guns! Boy! Is he ready for trial!”

1:28 pm. Everyone is almost here, waiting to get into court. A woman with a juror badge is looking for Eric Leonard, and was asking some of the other reporters if he’s around. She’s a fan, and wanted to try to see him. One of the Court TV cameramen explains gives the woman a description of what Eric looks like, and that Eric is probably in the media room on the 12th floor. Linda Deutch arrives, and Dominick Dunne is here.

1:35 pm. The Judge finally takes the bench. A new witness takes the stand, and I notice that Patrick Dixon is chewing gum. Steven whispers to me, “In his twenty five hundred dollar suit.”

The next witness is David Ridgs, and he’s a paramedic-firefighter for the Alhambra Fire Department. Alan Jackson conducts the direct examination. The witness talks about his training and explains that an EMT paramedic has more training than an EMT1, 2, or 3. When it comes to declaring death, the witness testifies that the pronouncement can only come from an MD. However, a paramedic can make a determination of death, and that happens through an assessment of the four basic life functions.

Ridgs testifies that they are on shift for 24 hours, and that he started at 8 am the prior day. Ridgs and his partner got the call out and stopped at the staging area. Staging areas are usually used in regards to crew safety. They staged at Grandview and Norwood, and that it wasn’t “out of the ordinary” to stage at a death scene.

1:45 pm Beth Karas comes into the courtroom. This is around the time she usually comes in for the afternoon session, after she’s finished giving on air commentaries. The jury is alert and watching the witness. The witness says they arrived at the staging scene around 6:05 to 6:10 am. The paramedics initially met with police officers at the gate and then at the north side of the address. The witnesses understanding of the initial call was that there were shots fired and there may be a shooting victim. In his career, the witness testified that he made maybe twenty or more death determinations.

I see Alan Jackson lean into Lana’s mother and whisper to her. This is something that I see a lot in the days ahead. Mr. Jackson will let Lana’s mother know when photo’s of her daughter’s body are up on the screen, so she can avert her eyes. There’s a close up of Lana’s face on the Elmo. Her head is slumped to her left. There are close up photos now of Lana’s right side, and the witness is asked about blood on Lana's left side.

A: No significant amount of blood on (Lana’s) left side.

Q: Did there appear to be any more on her right?

A: Yes. (snip) The majority of blood was on the patient’s right side even though she was leaning to the left.

Q: Did you notice the blood on her chest?

A: Yes.

Q: Did you check for vital signs?

A: Yes.

Q: Did you check the carotid?

A: Yes. (snip) If I recall, I checked the carotid pulse on the right; the exposed side.

The witness testifies that he manipulated the victims head to check her airway. Lana’s mother has a tissue to her face. She’s looking down. She doesn’t look up. She now hold the tissue in her hands, looking down. Something comes over me, watching Lana’s mother. It’s an overwhelming sense of sadness I feel for her.

The witness testifies that he looked for a gun shot wound, but the officer at the scene asked him to keep the (movement of her body) to a minimum. The coroner would determine cause of death, once he got there. Using a heart monitor, the witness attached patches to determine if he could see a heart rhythm. He couldn’t find one. Lana had been dead enough time for a determination at 6:25 am.

Direct testimony ends, and Linda Kenney Baden will conduct the cross.

The witness is asked who he saw in the foyer area. He saw six people.

Q: Were you ever asked to diagram the area?

A: No.

Q: Did yo know any of the six people? (I think there might have been a photo up on the Elmo that the witness was asked to look at; not sure.)

A: No.

Q: Did yo you see any of these (six people) wearing gloves?

A: I can’t remember.

Q: Even though you told the police off they could preserve the scene, they could do (that) without you?

A: That’s correct.

Q: There is going to be some disturbance of the scene? (Regarding his handling of the body to determine if the victim is dead.)

A: That’s correct. (snip) We were advised by our captain that shots were fired.

More detailed questions are asked.

Q: You could not find a gun shot wound?

A: That’s correct.

Q: Why did you make these notes?

A: My captain, Mark Lingle, said this might be a crime scene.

LKB is now crossing the witness with his interview with detectives. Images of the lower steps are put up on the Elmo. The step! I can see the wood of the first step! There isn’t any “gouge” in it like Dr. Lee claims. At least, from this angle of the photo, I’m not seeing a “gouge.” My back is killing me! These court benches with be what eventually wrecks my body. My low back is aching terribly, and I try to stretch it out while I am sitting.

More photos of Lana dead in the chair she was sitting in.

Q: Who asked you to leave those patches there?

A: A police officer who was photographing (the scene).

The witness now reviews a report. Now, with these next rapid fire questions, LKB is trying to say that in his exam, he moved her head to where it was in the photographs, and it was his manipulation that smeared the blood. In the images, I’m noticing, one of the patches to the the heard has a blood smear from where the patch was.

The witness says that he’s not experienced in microscopic blood flow.

Q: Did you ever see any of the foyer officers again?

A: I could have. I don’t remember.

LKB asks if he saw the tazer leads, and the witness replies that he only remembers seeing the leads themselves.

Q: Did anyone explain to you (what happened) before you arrived?

A: No.

Q: Did anyone explain to you that there had been an altercation?

A: No.

Q: Did you have any other interviews besides the one in March, 2007?

A: Not that I recall.

Redirect of the witness. The prosecutor gets the witness to say that the images of Lana up on the screen are exactly how he found her when she first arrived. Mr. Jackson gets the witness to make it clear, that at the time of his interview with detectives, he didn’t have access to those photographs to refresh his memory.

Recross of the witness. There are more questions regarding the prior statement that Lana’s chin was resting in the “center of the chest,” and if he had ever seen a tazer lead under a shoe at the crime scene before.

The judge finally calls the afternoon break. The famous law professor, Stan Goldman, is in the courtromm talking to Beth Karas, Harriet Ryan and other Court TV people in the room. I listen in as best I can and scribble some notes. They are discussing the legality of the Dr. Henry Lee debacle, entering into another trial in the future. The professor can’t conceive of a situation where that could come in. It’s now that Beth talks to me about what I had observed/overheard between Cutler & Rosen days ago. She tells me, that as long as I am not purposefully trying to invade a private room that the defense is meeting in, anything that I observed or overhear here in the courtroom I can write about. That’s what I had thought.

Spector sits at the defense table. The chair is turned around 180 degrees from the defense table, and he appears to be staring at the floor. His wife is on the first bench, attending to some items in her purse. Spector yawns. His hands are clasped, and they’re shaking slightly. It appears to be a blank stare on his face, and then he yawns again.

3:10 pm Break is over. I overheard Steve Dunleavy recounting the story where Spector attacked him. Dunleavy repeats Spector’s statement to him, “I’ll kill you!” with the ‘karate’ type movements directed towards him, and the threatening message Spector left on his answering machine days later. Spector had purposefully shoved into Dunleavy with his shoulder, and in response to that, Dunleavy punched him in the nose!

The next witness is called. Peneda Rodrigeuz? Do I have that right? Esther is her first name. Peneda is her married name, Rodriguez was her maiden name I think. I do not note who does the direct examination of this witness, but I think it's Patrick Dixon. She was a detective and assigned a regular type car, not a black and white. She heard the radio traffic and telephoned the watch commander that she was in route.

Q: This was a serious crime in your city and you needed to be involved.

A: That’s correct.

She identifies the residence via images up on the overhead screen. She notified her supervisor after arriving at the scene. Sergeant Santana (sp?) authorized that a GSR kit should be utilized at the scene. She performed the GSR test kit on Adriano DeSouza, and then drove DeSouza to the police station. The officer explains the training she received for performing the GSR test. (Now my notes are not clear as to whether or not she performed the GSR test on DeSouza at the scene, or at the police station.) She then describes her procedures for performing the test, then booked the test into evidence.

The direct examination is done, and Linda Kenney Baden will cross the witness. The witness testifies that yes, she filed a report regarding everything she did.

Q: In fact, you made an assumption it was a crime scene.

A: That’s correct.

Q: In the reports you drafted on February 3rd and February 7th, you called the address a crime scene?

A: Yes.

Linda Kenney Baden paces a bit. LKB asks if she did anything else at the scene. She spoke to DeSouza at the scene, and was making inquiries about the scene with the other officers present. There are a few more questions, asking the witness if she spoke with the EMT, etc.

Cross is finished, and redirect begins.

The witness is asked why she thought it was a crime scene, and she explains. Redirect is finished, and LKB recrosses the witness again.

Q: Was that the only reason? Because you had talked to DeSouza, is that correct?

A: That’s correct.

And this witness is excused for the time being.

I don’t have any more notes in my book, but I do specifically remember out on the street, as I was waiting for the light to cross, I turned to one of the group of six people who I thought were from a production crew, and asked why did they decide to come to court today. The man replied, “Just thought we’d come down and watch the trial.” Steven was walking with me, because I remember saying, “Well, there’s more to that story....” and we both had a chuckle.

Trial Notes, 5-22-07

Updated
I get to the Orange line a few seconds too late and miss the 8 am bus. I catch the next one about five minutes later. I finished y book over the weekend, and forgot to put another inside my purse this morning. On the transit news feed, there’s an ad for FOLICARE. It’s for male pattern baldness. There are a few beside me on the bus who could use this product, but they don’t seem to be interested.

Passengers perk up when news of the Spector trial comes on the screen. Other news reported was about the young actor who crashed his car and a passenger was killed. He took a guilty plea. I didn’t catch whether he’s been sentenced yet. I see a grown man totally engrossed in a Superman Comic Book, with his girlfriend asleep, leaning on his shoulder. Even though I was late, I still make the 8:30 Red Line train. This is good. It means I should get to the rear of the Criminal Court Building by about 9:05 am. I see a woman applying her make up on the train. I make a judgment call, that she’s putting on way too much blush on her face. The air is not very good on the train today. It’s quite stuffy.

I finally reach the 9th floor. I see Mr. Dunne and the Dunleavy guy who was here yesterday. Michelle is sitting with Dominick. The auburn haired Dateline reporter is here. Harriet Ryan and David K. Li are chatting away. No Spector yet. DeSouza arrives with his entourage. Two hefty bodyguard like guys accompany him into the courtroom. Right afterwards, the jurors file past the hallway into the courtroom. Now the Spector entourage arrives. His purchased wife Rachelle Short on one arm, and a bodyguard on either side of them and one in front.

An inmate from the jail is brought into court 107 in a wheelchair. I notice injuries to his scalp as he passes me. Mr. Dunne smiles and says hello. John Spano (who was yawning when he arrived in the hallway) is looking around smiling going, “Okay! Here we are again!” We are finally led into the courtroom, and the reporters are all settling into their favorite viewing spots. It’s 9:30 and we haven’t started yet. I see the court reporter emerge from the judge’s chambers.

The family arrives with their tall attorney with jet black hair. The Dateline reporter moves in to talk to the attorney, and it’s just the two of them by themselves talking now. Ed arrives and it looks like he got a haircut. And he’s not wearing his glasses. I wonder if he’s got contacts in. The attorney’s exit the judges chambers now, so they were in camera. Jackson and Dixon step off by themselves right next to the witness box to discuss something. There are five elderly gentlemen all sitting together in the row behind me. These are some new trial watchers that I haven’t seen before. Rochelle is writing on some paper; looks like a notepad. It’s hard to see from where I’m sitting.

The judge is on the bench and there is something, possibly about what was said in chambers. There are no improprieties on behalf of juror #6. The hearing they just had will be part of the official transcript. Private information will be redacted from the e-mails. Spector and the defense attorneys stand, everyone else gets up, and the jury files in.

DeSouza is still on redirect. The prosecution resumes playing the video tape exhibit of DeSouza's interview with detectives. The jurors have copies of the transcript of the interview. Most are not watching the video, but reading along with the transcript. Oh wait, #9 is watching the video. Looking at the thickness of the transcript the jurors are holding, it appears they are not even half way through this video.

So, I settle in to watch the jurors. Mostly the jurors are reading, and I see the judge is watching the video. It’s very difficult to understand because the sound quality is terrible. The judge is looking at the transcript now. I write out this note to Steven: “CAN YOU UNDERSTAND ANYTHING?” Steven shakes his head no. Adriano DeSouza is sitting in the front row. How strange that must be for him, to watch and listen to his interview with police. I’m wondering what Rochelle is writing in that notepad, since she’s still writing. One of the bodyguards is reading a book while the video plays. Judge still watching the video.

From the video:

“Why did you call the secretary first?”
I don’t know. I don’t know.

I note the date and time on the tape: 2-3-0 12:24:51 am

Now, DeSouza is explaining his movements after calling Michelle Baine, Spector’s secretary. And then, there it is on the tape. “I think I, killed; I think I killed somebody.” This is so damaging to the defense. I see Rachelle is resting her hand to her face, her fingers on her forehead; her thumb on her chin. I see juror #9 say something to juror #8. #8 looks over the gallery, almost like he’s searching for a face. Michelle and Dominick exchange notes. On the video now, DeSouza is imitating for the detectives how Spector was talking and slurring his words. The detectives go through his statements again.

DeSouza: “I think I killed somebody.”
Detective: “You’re sure about what you heard?”
DeSouza: “Yes.”

It’s 10:15 am and they’re almost through the tape. Maybe 10 to 15 pages more of video. The still photographer drops his camera! It lands on one of the Court TV camera operator’s head! Everyone turns to look to see what happened. Juror #9 looks out at the gallery. He doesn’t follow the last few pages of transcript. On the video, the detective tells DeSouza, “It’s going to be a big case. Whomever he (Spector) hires, I can guarantee, he will hire investigators to look into you and try to talk to you.”

It was obvious on the video that DeSouza was totally freaked out by what happened. The attorneys have a side bar at the bench at the end of the video. Jackson collects the transcripts, and DeSouza is back on the stand.

Unfortunately in my notes, I forget to document if DeSouza is under cross or direct. I believe he’s under cross, and that Brunon is conducting it.

DeSouza says that Detective Pinyeta (sp?) gave him a ride to the police station. 5:10 am was the 911 call. Around 6 am, DeSouza says that was the next time that he saw Spector again. That was when the police escorted him from the house. Brunon is really trying to get DeSouza to say he could be wrong about what he heard. The prosecution objects now to several questions in a row being improper. The defense is really try to get him to focus on the fact that on the tape, after he tells them Spector’s words, “I think I killed somebody,” right afterwards on the tape he says, “I think, I’m not sure.” DeSouza explains on the stand, “I said that to Mr. Pinyeta because I’m not sure he understood what I said.”

Spectors elbows are on the table; fingers inter clasped and his hands shaking. Now the defense is going over the condition of Spector and whether or not he was drunk at the time he emerged from the house. Also re questioning DeSouza on the “shoulder shrugging.” The defense is digging away at those inconsistencies. I mostly see Mr. Jackson from the back, his fingertips pressed together. His chin resting on his fingers. I’m betting he’s really focused right now. Juror #9 yawns the same time I do. I watch Spector clench his hands together into a fist like clasp. I can’t see totally, but it sure looks like Rachelle is taking notes still on that pad. Maybe she’s writing a letter? She appears now to be looking at the jury. She looks up, then looks down for a bit, but I can’t see her hands. So I’m not sure what she is doing, except looking down at her lap a lot.

Q: You said: “I want someone to direct me.” What did that mean?
A: To help me to explain what I had to do.

The defense asks DeSouza more questions on the deportation issue and then Brunon finally says, no more questions.

Jackson steps up to do the redirect.

Q: Who asked Lana back to the Castle?
A: Phil
Q: Did he ask one time?
A: No.
Q: Did he ask two times?
A: No.
Q: Did he ask three times?
A: Around three times.
Q: You were subpoenaed?
A: Yes.
Q: Are you mistaken about what you saw, what you heard that day?
A: No.

And DeSouza is finally off the stand! The court is on break. The cameraman who was hit in the head with a camera had a set of headphones on, so maybe it didn’t bump his head too hard. Another reporter leans into him and says, “The judge was concerned about you. He looks over at you a few times.” The camera operator replies, “Maybe he was looking at you,” (meaning, the cameraman who dropped the camera!)

Spector is standing alone at the defense table. He comes over to his wife and they both exit the courtroom. I talk for a bit to Dominick, but a man interrupts by coming up to Dominick and fawns all over him. Dominick says, “It’s always nice when people say something nice to you.” I reply to him, “You have a big fan club.” Mr. Dunne replies, “It happened to me late in life. I still have trouble getting used to it. That was a terrible cross by Brunon from start to finish!” We then discuss Dr. Henry Lee. Dominick does not hold back on how he feels about how he feels about Dr. Lee. I say, “It will be interesting to see if they put Dr. Lee on the stand.” Dominick replies, “Did you see that? him on the stand, where he got all arrogant? I’ve head him tell that joke so many times.”

We talk about the missing evidence and I tell Dominick, “I think Dr. Lee lost it. He said on the stand it was a private case and not a state case. That procedures were not as precise. He kept claiming, no one told him what to do with the evidence. I don’t believe it. I think he lost it. Dominick says, “I can’t stand him. The jurors (in the past), they fawn all over him, even though there was no jury there.”

Back in the courtroom, it’s 11:20 am and we’re back on the record.

The next witness is Sandra Hill, and Dixon will take her direct examination.

Sandra is a Public Safety Dispatch Supervisor, in charge of the sheriff’s office computerized systems. She’s worked for the Sheriff’s Dept. seventeen years. She is also familiar with the 911 system in Los Angeles County. The witness goes into detail on how 911 calls made from cell phones were routed back in February, 2003. The system archives all calls on a DVD, and they are held for 180 days. She testifies that “We search for calls on our system for that date (2-3-07). We only found one call. The computer searches by date and by location.” There is a two page document of that single call put up on the Elmo.

Rosen gets up to cross the witness.

Rosen is plodding through everything, going over the witness’s testimony in detail. I think the defense strategy is to put these jurors to sleep!

Q: Can you tell (from the report) if an ambulance was sent?
A: No, I can not.

Redirect:

The witness says the training process for 911 operators is a very lengthy process. At least four weeks. After that, there is one on one training to ensure they are properly trained to handle calls.

Recross

Rosen: This will be brief.
Judge: I wouldn’t believe it.

Rosen points out that the call says, “lady lying on the ground.

I see the judge rub his face.

The witness replies that the operators are trained to write what was said.

When the witness is finally done with cross, the judge jokingly says that she can discuss her testimony.

The next witness is called. Gamaliel Catalan. Unfortunately, I don’t have in my notes who conducts the direct examination. I believe it’s Dixon though. She is a communications Supervisor for Alhambra P.D. He supervises the communication center. Two shifts of employees. The witness says that they are the Public Safety Answering point.

It’s 12 noon, and Judge Fidler says, “And although we’re on the edge of our seats...”

Laughter fills the courtroom.

Updated 6-14-07 12:12am
Lunch is about over. It’s about 1:18 pm, and a man comes up to court with some papers for Spector. It’s a large envelope, and it gets passed to the two bodyguards there. One reporter says, “Maybe it’s a fingernail.” Finally, we are allowed to enter the courtroom. Cutler saunters in. Linda Deutsch and Roger Rosen are having a conversation. Steve Dunleavy, the legendary New York Post reporter who punched out Spector years ago is in the courtroom today. Rochelle has her hair up and pulled back, and it’s obvious she’s got a hair piece, blondish curls handing down. Steven speculates that maybe it’s one of Phil’s hair pieces on her head. The court is now trying to determine if the coroner has a conflict of scheduling. He’s scheduled to testify in courtroom 104 regarding a child abuse case.

Direct continues of the communications supervisor, Gamaliel Catalan.

Catalan testifies that he located one call, transfer from the CHP. A search of their records revealed “no calls” to be found from that residence made from land lines. The 911 call document is put up on the screen.

Direct is over, and Rosen steps up to cross the witness.

This is unbelievably tedious. Rosen is asking what term would you use to describe the document. He’s asking what all the little codes mean, and the witness explains. Rosen then asks if he can tell which words are spoken by the dispatcher, and which were spoken by the caller.

A: No.

Rosen then goes on with his tone of voice, that this is a big deal, that we can’t tell who said what. Rosen points out on the document that at 5:56:10 am, one subject confirmed dead. And the witness replies that just means the dispatcher documented information he received over the radio.

Q: Do you know who handled the call?
A: Bobbick.
Q: do you know which officer, CHP she spoke with?
A: I don’t know.

Cross if finally finished, and redirect begins.

Q: What type of training (do the dispatchers receive)?
A: 120 hours of basic dispatch training, then they are one 24 hour training.
Q: Why is it important to be accurate?
A: To dispatch resources in an accurate manner.

There are a few more questions about the dispatchers probing the caller to get more information and then redirect is done.

Recross.

Q: Is it correct that you have found errors have occurred?
A: Human nature.

And finally, we are done with this witness. The next witness is Officer Sean Heckers. I forget to write in my notes who is performing the direct examination.

Officer Heckers is a with the City of Alhambra, and on February 3, 2003, he was assigned to patrol duty.

Q: Were you in uniform, and drove a black and white?
A: Yes sir, I did.
Q: How long at that time (were you with the Alhambra PD)?
A: Eight years.
Q: What shift (were you working)?
A: Day. I started a 6 am and went to 6 pm.
Q: How many days?
A: Three days a week.
Q: Had you ever been to 1700 Grand View before?
A: No I had not.

The witness confirms that he was just ordered to report there and assist. He was assigned to transport Spector back to the Alhambra police station. He identifies Spector as the individual he transported. The witness says his memory is not clear as to whether or not he was handcuffed while in the cruiser, but it’s rare that a suspect wouldn’t be handcuffed when being transported.

The witness testifies that he was told to administer a GSR residue kit. He explains the kits are uniquely numbered and what the kit consists of, and the procedures that are followed to administer the test. The witness was previously with the San Marino, PD. This was the first time he did the GSR test kit in the field. Once the test was completed, he booked it into evidence.

Q: Do you remember if an Alhambra paramedic or fireman came by?
A: To be honest, I can’t recall.
Q: Did you go to another facility, to have a sex test kit done?
A: Yes.
Q: What was the facility?
A: San Gabriel Valley Medical Center.

After this test, Officer Gullam Santan (sp?) escorted Spector back to the station. Photos of Spector were put on the screen. These are his Polaroid booking photos. He was then taken to the jail. End of direct examination.

Linda Kenney Baden is to do the cross. I can see that she’s working from a large spiral notebook. “I’m not sure I’ve met you. You look like the Judge’s brother,” LKB says. And the judge makes a comment about that. The witness states that he didn’t know Spector, just knew of the property. LKB now goes over the witnesses transcript of his (prior grand jury???) testimony. LKB asks him in detail about the GSR test, going over every tiny detail of the test, and asking him if he knows “why” certain procedures are followed. LKB is also trying to insinuate, through her questions, that GSR could have been in the back of the patrol car where Spector was handcuffed with his hands behind his back.

LKB asks how many suspects in that car a week before? Two weeks before? How about on the bench that Spector sat on at the jail? What type of guns do they carry in your department? All these questions to try to imply that the GSR found on Spector wasn’t from the murder weapon, but from the police car or bench he sat on, at the station.

Break is finally called. Spector left the courtroom. Rachelle sits in the back row with a bodyguard. Roger Rosen comes over to Dominick to deliver a message from someone they must both know. Rosen chats a bit about his computer workstation in the house, or his daughter’s workstation. It was a funny conversation. Rosen says he’s not real computer literate. Steven says, “We know where this GSR stuff is going!” There are some new trial watchers in the gallery staring at Steve Dunleavy.

Break is over, and we’re back on cross.

LKB continues with the GSR nightmare cross. Boring, boring questions. LKB paces when she asks questions, and her tone is a bit loud and has an accusatory tone. The prosecution just made it’s second objection to a question, and the Judge calls up counsel for a side bar. Then the Judge is in his chambers, the attorneys are in front of the clerk’s desk, and it’s a waiting game here. Now, we’re back on the record.

There are more questions about Spector being handcuffed in front verses being handcuffed in back. Baden asks if the other officers had guns, and then the type of vehicle Spector was transported in. This is all just to get these questions in the jurors mind. Now she’s talking about the rape kit exam, and if Spector disrobed in front of him.

Q: Did you see the nurse (Caruso) pluck anal hairs from him?
A: I don’t recall that specifically.
Q: Were you there when genital hairs were plucked?
A: Yes.
Q: After he disrobed, and went through the sexual assault exam, did you see Nurse Caruso, swab under his nails (and use) a light source through his hair?
A: I believe so.

Now, more questions back on GSR, and if he knew the reason why it was important to fill out all the documentation. (It’s basically a trick question, because if you don’t give every possibility, then the attorney can come back and say, “Well, what about this? Didn’t you learn this reason, too?")

Cross is finally over and redirect begins.

There are questions about the patrol cars being cleaned on a regular basis, and it’s here where we learn that the back seats of patrol cars are plastic and contoured, so that you can have your hands rest more comfortably behind your back while sitting in the car. And the witness testifies that the presence of guns in the back of a patrol car is very rare.

LKB is not going to let this go, she has to recross! Groan!

Q: You can’t testify to the technicality of GSR transfer can you? You can’t testify as to cleaning, how often? How many suspects who could have had GSR (on them)?

Finally, she’s done, and the prosecution has no more questions. We’re finally onto the next witness, Michael Brown (Fireman Brown), and Patrick Dixon handles the direct examination.

He is employed by the Alhambra fire Department. At the time of the event, he had been a firefighter/paramedic for one year. Fireman Brown details his training. In Alhambra, they rotate onto a fire engine in addition to paramedic work. He testifies that he was dispatched ot Alhambra Jail at 6:16 pm on February 3, 2003, for a patient who was tazed.

Q: What does “tazed” mean?

The witness says that he just knows what the public knows, and describes what he knows of tazing. The break is finally called. I’m about to fall asleep.

Q: So, it was at Alhambra Police Station where you met Phil Spector?
A: That’s correct.
Q: You went to see if he was okay?
A: Yes. It’s very common that we go down there to check on a patient.

The witness saw him on a silver bench. His partner evaluated Spector, and he documented everything. They work together. They evaluate for basic human functions. A.B.C. Airway, Breathing, Conscious. The witness states that Spector, “Wasn’t talking too much.”

Q: Did he seem to be okay?
A: Yes.
Q: Were there any marks on his skin from the tazer?
A: No.

The witness and his partner went through the primary and secondary assessment. They asked Spector if he wanted to go to the hospital. He declined. They took a medial assessment, listed meds, etc. Anything Spector might be taking. And that’s it. Direct is done.

LKB performs the cross, and starts as usual, by introducing herself. LKB gets the witness to verify that he and his partner were called at a little after 6:00 pm, and that he filled out some forms documenting the visit and treatment. LKB gets the witness to admit that they only spent about seven and a half minutes with Spector total. She now asks about the tazering of Spector.

A: I was looking over my partner’s shoulder. The barbs were not attached. The witness said he looked down Spector’s shirt.
Q: But you didn’t see down “here” (LKB points to her waist area).
A: No, I did not.

The witness states that an EMT-Paramedic has more advanced training than just a regular EMT. LKB is now going over the report he filled out with him. On the report is written “diabetes.”

Q: What are you looking for when someone is tazered?
A: Checking to see if the barbs are still in the skin. If the patient is uncomfortable; in pain.

THIS IS SO BORING! Finally! Cross is finished and redirect starts.

Dixon gets the witness to state that if there are no medical complaints, then the Paramedics give no treatment.

LKB gets up to RECROSS! Sheesh!

Q: You gave him a glaucoma score? Did not find any obvious signs of alcohol?
A: No.

Court is finally over for the day. The witness is done. Finally! Steven said that he needed a tazer jolt. Tomorrow they will continue with the inquiry into the missing evidence.

I have already transcribed the judge’s ruling and posted it here, but I still need to add a few notes covering where Sara Caplan was called to the stand one last time.