Heated cross

Prosecutor Alan Jackson's cross-examination of defense expert Vincent DiMaio has gotten heated, with thinly veiled insults going in both directions. Jackson implied DiMaio, who said he is paid $400 an hour, is more of an advocate than a scientist. The jurors, some of whom looked bored during DiMaio's testimony Tuesday, perked up, clearly enjoying the fray.

At the break, Spector attorney Roger Rosen told Fidler that Jackson was editorializing to entertain the jury. "We are not here to entertain the jury. This man's life is on the line," he said, gesturing to Spector. As Rosen spoke, loud voices and laughter could be heard from behind the closed door of the jury room. Fidler said Jackson may indeed be out of order, and advised Rosen to raise objections if he felt it necessary. Rosen had said he did not object because DiMaio was attorney Christopher Plourd's witness. Fidler encouraged him to go ahead.

Comments

[Richwriter]

Jackson shredded the defense "expert" witness this afternoon in a demonstration of legal logic the likes of which is rarely seen. The jury was entertained and Rosen was furious with Jackson making DiMaio look like the pompous fraud that he is -

Love you Alan! You go!

[Austin Taylor]

Mr. Jackson needs to settle down. He is letting the jury know this Doctor is crushing the prosecution's case. While Jackson is a smart guy he is a lightweight when it comes to the doctor. Dr. DiMaio brought it around to his point of view each and every time and made Jackson look like an unprepared and excited school kid.

What DiMaio said makes sense. We aren't a bunch of sponges and at one time everyone thought the world was flat. Whether we like it or not more can be learned about forensic pathology when testing of living creatures are done. These calves were going to be slaughtered anyway and shooting is much more humane than cutting their heads off while they are held in a chute in some slaughterhouse.

To gain much needed knowledge we cant stagnate and accept old methods but find new ones that brings more knowledge to light for the betterment of all.

[ted]

Mr DiMaio is hardly crushing the prosecution's case, in some ways he was stating highly speculative stuff, without linking much of was already presented to the court. One of the most important things to correlate his testimony is Clarkson's hands when she was shot. There will always be doubt because the gun was wiped, Spector washed his hands of gunpowder residue before the cops arrived, and he pocketed the gun. If she shot herself, the gun would had gone across the room. She was also cleaned up, besides the gun was put on her left side, for a right handed person DeMaio is completely ignoring all that, and just using the lowest common denominator in getting his conclusion.

Second of all he is not a psychiatrist, and having him pretend to be an expert on Lana Clarkson's mental state through some expository writing and some diary entries, is a step above his weight class. I find it incredulous that he is stating some of the stuff, and I would like to see other gunshots through the mouth where the gases cause the same exact bruising to the tongue than what the coroner stated how the bruising came about.

I don't think he is coming across as very plausible..

[Michael]

Dimaio is clearly a hack and his testimony has been a disaster for the defense. He comes across as arrogant, pedantic, defensive, and just plain wrong. On the other hand, all this debate about whether back spatter can travel 3 feet or 6 feet plays into the hands of the defense because it makes it seem as if that is significant. Juries get distracted by all this and end up focusing on small details that are essentially irrelevant.

[Lisa]

Ha , Ha

DIMaio looked like a blithering idiot, Spector spent a hell of a lot of money on him, and for what? He did nothing for his case.