Defense hid evidence
Judge Larry Paul Fidler made a ruling this morning likely to be heard around the world -- that famous criminalist Henry Lee withheld evidence from prosecutors. At issue was a small, white object three people said they saw at the crime scene. A former Spector defense lawyer, Sara Caplan, and a defense investigator both said they saw Lee pick up the object in the foyer of Spector's Alhambra mansion. Prosecutors claim it was a piece of Lana Clarkson's fingernail, which would show, as Head Deputy Dist. Atty Patrick Dixon said in court, that Clarkson's hand was in front of her face when the shot was fired, so "her hands and her fingers were not on the trigger." Lee had testified attorney Caplan was mistaken in what she saw. Fidler called Lee a "world renowned expert," but said "I have to choose between the two and Miss Caplan is more credible than Dr. Lee." Fidler said he couldn't say if the item was a fingernail, but ruled jurors can be told about the missing item and decide for themselves, using the information to weigh Lee's credibility. The jury would, however, be told not to hold the infraction against Mr. Spector, since there was no evidence he knew about the breach, which was committed by his former defense team. Lee, formerly the chief criminalist for the State of Connecticut, has become both a celebrity since his appearance in the O.J. Simpson trial and a busy expert witness in trials around the world. This month he testified in a murder case in his native Taiwan, and was awarded an honorary degree by Johnson and Wales University in Florida. The defense claims Clarkson shot herself. Lee, a key defense witness, is expected to testify about scientific evidence he says demonstrates that Spector was too far away to fire the lethal shot at Clarkson. Experts say Fidler's ruling can now be cited to impeach Lee in other court cases as well.
I have a question: why did Henry Lee have to turn over what he found? What is the source of the legal requirement that he do so? Is it a discovery rule? Something else?
Posted by: Charlie | May 23, 2007 at 04:52 PM
Charlie, in California there is a rule of reciprocal discovery. The defense has the same duty to turn over evidence as the prosecution. I think the rule is contained in the California Penal Code, around section 1054.
Posted by: David | May 23, 2007 at 11:25 PM
Besides obviously murdering ms. Clarkson, Mr. Spector is not doing himself any favors by sitting in a plush chair and hiring a mafia defense attorney. He shows up in court being guarded by two 350 pound bodyguards. Is this supposed to intimidate the jury. The fact that he had his freedom for four years while poor Ms. Clarkson has been in the ground is a disgrace. He should have his bail revoked and be jailed until the verdict. Now their going to tarnish and destroy her reputation in a last ditch effort to conceal the truth. If this bastard gets away with this it will show you only need money and you can kill anybody.
Posted by: chris | May 30, 2007 at 02:33 PM
Chris, you are absolutely right. Money does buy freedom, i.e., OJ Simpson and Robert Blake and probably many others who have the bucks but not the stardom.
Sad...the scales of justice are weighted down by drawn out trials where minutia is discussed at length to obscure the truth.
Posted by: susan | June 02, 2007 at 02:56 PM
Wait a minute! You have not seen all of the evidence but yet you judge, shame on all of you.
Just because Phil has money is no reason to bash him!
Thank you,
JoyceDanelen@yahoo.com
Joyce Danelen
Posted by: JOYCEDANELEN@YAHOO.COM | June 06, 2007 at 10:29 AM
Okay - let's not bash Phil because of his money (& hence power) but rather -lets bash him because he has a history of intended gun-violence against the women he knew.
Like all kinds of domestic violence, if it continues, this is no different -- usually ends in a tragedy.
Posted by: SoundMind | August 21, 2007 at 01:47 PM