Spector bought scientific efforts, juror says

“I can look at myself in the mirror tomorrow and know that I did the right thing.”

That’s what one juror who voted to convict Phil Spector of murder said after a mistrial was declared in the famous music producer's trial.

The juror, who did not identify himself, said the Spector defense “bought” scientific experts.

Asked at a news conference this afternoon if Spector should be tried again, the juror said, “I think so.”

The two other jurors who agreed to be interviewed, also without giving their names, declined to state an opinion.

“That’s for the judge to decide,” said one, who identified himself as the foreman.

“It’s not our call,” said the third.

Comments

[A.O.]

To JW,JK&JL : We all now know the news and hopefully more jurors come out and maybe determine the I.D. of the 2 hold-outs are. There is a focus that one may be the foreman but its not really not important . At the next trial I hope there is another blog with the L.A. TIMES and K.T.L.A. (lonnie & Marta) and I'am sure we can kick the next one around as we did on this one. JW, JK , & JL stay healthy and enjoy the last bit of summer also stay away from Phil s home if he is drinking . A.O. & doggy "WOFF"

[JL]

My health? Interesting comment. I have late stage colon cancer and may not be around for the next one but I still believe that a jury can be impaneled that will render a just verdict. I only hope the judge is fair and I think that Spector's judge was fair.

Re-trying the case will give the prosecution a second chance to prove its case. Maybe they can show the science based defense rebuttal is in error. If so, then they will get a guilty verdict and I will also have changed my mind. I would hope that NO juror would vote to convict based on Spector's prior behavior. Of course, had their been a conviction, Spector would only have a second chance if his appeal could prove a trial error caused his conviction - not easy to do.

The prosecutors get a second chance. Let's see if they can convict based on evidence and not emotion.

I certainly hope the jurors will not be like the one quoted above who voted for guilty because he thinks the Defense experts were "bought". That comment is disturbing. Of course, they were bought by the defense. - just like they were bought in previous cases when it was LA county paying their fee. The experts are entitled to their fees and they testified they billed the defense the same fee they usually bill the government. At least two of the experts have testified for the LA county prosecutors in previous trials.

Best wishes to all!

[Janet]

Perhaps a mistrial is better than a guilty verdict. A guilty verdict may very well have been overturned after all the goings-on of the judge. Now at least we get a retrial.

Wow...those two holdouts...amazing.

[LACountyResident]

I think juries in LA should be able to come in at a count of 10 to allow for the nut factor. 10 and 1> nuts. A travesty. But the rest of the jurors also wimped out by letting 10 sit as foreman. Sounds like a couple tried, but the judge should have been informed at 6 hours that NO VOTE was taken.

[A.O.]

Oh My : Juror #10 was the lone hold-out (with #1 on the fence) The Foreman just was not going to budge and had a response for everything and was still listening for someone to convince him . The water engineer just would not be persuaded but could find fault with anything that was presented , Oh My ! In our imperfect world which has imperfect people killing , assaulting , intimidating other people EVERY day of the year ( buy a police scanner ) courts overburden, prisons filled and a juror pondering how Lana shot herself, Phil holding the gun , never calling 911 , resisting police , having a record of pointing his gun at women , how Lana,s palm print got on the gun while his disappeared whom was the last one who held it Oh my ! The disciple of SCIENCE ( LEARNING MORE AND MORE, ABOUT LESS AND LESS ) (SEARCHING FOR ANSWERS FOR THEY DO NOT KNOW or ACCEPT) if there was a vedio with sound a disciple would question the speed of images and the audio range within the spectrum, would want the report card from kindergarten to the highest learning , NO , there is nothing that would change the mind of a perfect juror in an imperfect world , NOT IN THIS DEMENSION .

[JW]

JL..First...I am so sorry to hear of your health situation...God bless you.

A.O. thanks for the nice note...I appreciate that we were all able to express our views and not attack each personally.

Juror #9 makes disturbing comments to me as well. He is not one I would want on a jury. It almost seems to me that he read or watched coverage of this trial...some of his very comments are the same as I read previously on other blogs. His disparaging diggs to Linda Kenney surely takes away from his credibility...referring to her dark roots and her styling in clothes. What did that have to do with this trial? He seems to criticize Juror #10...almost as if he were in competition with him and lost. Ricardo seems very controlling and my guess would be he could not control or change #10 or #1...he made a comment there was nothing about #1 that made him want to be her friend. I think he is out for his 15 minutes of fame and is getting it with CTV. Does he really believe all..every single one...of the defense experts would lie and put their careers and all their life work down the tube for this one case? Jamie Floyd on CTV reminded him today that the prosecutors and their experts were paid as well. In my opinion, the judge had a lot to do with some of the jurors changing their vote AFTER he did the reinstruction...almost as if he was telling them "this is how you can convict". He surely intended to help the prosecutor in my opinion. But, in the end, it failed. I admire those who are strong enough to stand up for their beliefs. Juror #1 reportedly at one point said she would vote to convict but "under protest" and the other jurors told her not to. I just wonder if juror #9 was pushing her. It would really be interesting to hear the other 10 jurors and get the rest of the story. At any rate, I do feel this was a win for the defense...and I just read an article at CTV that said the slate is wiped clean now to start the 2nd trial and that the advantage goes to the defense. That shocked me as usually CTV anchors and reporters are usually so pro prosecution.

A.O. again thanks for you note...I look forward to sparring with you and your doggy next go round.

Take care.

[mimi]

Sorry to hear about your illness, JL. Respectfully, I think the juror who disliked the "bought" experts got it right. Whatever their past work, in this trial, Baden and Spitz were disgustingly biased. I thought they smelled to high heavern. These prosecutors proved their case beyond any reasonable doubt-- unfortunately, reasonableness and common sense were lacking in the engineer and one other juror. Better luck with the next jury pool.

[JL]

Mimi:

If any evidence had been introduced that tied Spector to the crime I would have expected a guilty verdict. The problem is the science (if you want to call it that) produced by the prosecution was inadequate. The processing of the crime scene was not proper. The same scientists that testified for the prosecution were the same ones destroying evidence. It was incompetence to be charitable. Why do you think DA Jackson made personal attacks against Defense counsel and some of their witnesses (like the paramedic who was only explaining that the DA had misread a document)? He did it because he was desperate for a guilty verdict and would do anything including witness intimidation to accomplish his goal. I think he has the ethics of a jackal.

If the Defense experts slanted their testimony to the detriment of the truth, then I hope they are held accountable. The best way to do that is for the LA Coroner to stop using them on other cases (both have been used frequently in the past). That will hit them in the wallet. The other way is for this judge and judges in future cases to refuse to designate them as Expert witnesses. If he does that, there will be a big controversy.

I have a question about the Crime lab scientists who studied using text books by at least one of these experts but who disagreed with the author of the text books and their own professors. Why should we believe them? They are also paid well (by the county no less). If they change their opinion and "cut & run" from the prosecutor's theory, what happens to their careers?

Given the LA prosecutor's office record (McMartin, etc.), jurors should hold them strictly accountable - even where the judge seems intimidated and does not do so.

The government has all the advantages. The prosecutor gets to try again to "sell their theory". It will be interesting to see if they can address the shortcomings in their first try.

In the end, unless new evidence is found, an unbiased jury that is using its critical thinking skills will come to my conclusion: she was on drugs, had been drinking and was acting foolishly, playing with a gun that discharged into her mouth. I would not call it suicide, but an accidental death. The five women who accused Spector of threatening them were not proven at trial, they were only accusations. The judge should never have allowed such highly prejudicial testimony to be introduced. It was very unfair and Spector was in no position to deny it.

I also think a new judge should preside who is not in the pocket of the DA.

Best to all.

[A.O.]

JL: I'am sorry to hear of your condition and I hope you are under the care of board certified specialists doing everything they can. JW : #9 and another juror ran for Foreman as well as #10 who won the vote. #10 gave the grand speech and little else . Even if not required, being the Foreman (again not required) He did not want to discuss the case, having knowledge the PUBLIC wanted to know what happened in the Deliberation Room , yet still felt and refuse to say nothing, Then WHY did he accept the position of Foreman ? If it was not for the other two jurors, WE would know nothing . I reviewed my " Trial Juror's Handbook " (L.A. County) and feel that he could have done more , but again , he is who he is therefore the Public must accept his decision JW : Your heinous attack on Juror #9 is appalling. For a righteous , fair minded , truth, justice and the American way, You entered a maelstrom of a vigilante, You have charged, tried and convicted juror # 9 for being who he is, A person who was honest, accepted and became a juror, I cannot find words to express my outrage and disappointment as you released your inner-self to the Public. Furthermore, you made my doggy cry as I read your hate-filled response to him. Shame, Shame, Shame on you, with that said, Enjoy whats left of summer. A.O.

[JW]

A O... I call it as I see it. And that is how I saw it with #9. I stand behind my prior words. You certainly have your own criticism of #10 so the pot should be careful calling the kettle black! JF clearly told all jurors they could speak with the press if THEY SO CHOSE..if they chose not to that is their right..foreman or not. Perhaps there was a good reason #10 was chosen foreman. I have not heard one iota of critiicism from you with respect to the other 9 jurors not speaking out...#10 was not the only one who voted NG...just because one is foreperson does not mean that they are required to speak to the press ... I doubt you will find that requirement in your jury handbook. Yet you criticize him for that. SHAME on you! Your inner self and self righteousness is revealed as well. But, then I knew that a long time ago from your prior posts. I said it before and I will say it again, some of the things #9 said were disturbing to me!

Take care AO.

[Allegra]

Whatever happened to common sense? Phil Spector has done this many times before - only this time the gun went off. Simple enough?
No....it's so much more logical to believe that a strange woman came to his house, located his gun, sat down in the foyer, and shot herself in the mouth. Happens all the time. Umhmm....
Spector's used guns to threaten at least five women when they wanted to leave (five whom the jury knew about, actually I believe there were others who the judge didn't allow in, as well as numerous gun incidents involving valets, musicians, and friends). It was just a matter of time before he murdered someone. That jury didn't need an enginneer, they needed a statistician - or a bookie - someone who could figure the odds: how many times can you point guns at people before someone gets hurt?
Please....Juror No. 10 - the foreman - was an embarrassment. He needed a psychological profile of Lana Clarkson - I'm sure that would have required another 20 volumes of notes. Talk about not seeing the forest for the trees! What a ninny! H. L. Mencken said no one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public - No. 10 proves his point.

[jk]

JL, Godspeed up the road to recovery.
A.O., you're the funk-master. Thanks for the words.
Et.Al., let's not forget that the prosecution 'experts' concerning the forensics are bought and paid for by the DA's office.
I respect the foreman immensely. He is brilliant. I'm glad that our jury system appears to be working--he and his counterpart that voted NG couldn't be swayed. As for the gent who chose to spew it all--he's had his 15 minutes and deserves them even though he presents himself as the 'righteous one.'
Peace Out until the next bout.
"Da Doo Ron Ron. . .."

[enlightenme]

According to #9, juror #10 was using evidence NOT produced in the trial as part of his arguments. Near the end of the deliberations, #10 stated that "perhaps Phil told the limo driver to call 911." DeSousa never said that and Phil did not get on the stand to say that he said that. It was pure speculation on #10's part. It was then that juror #9 said he knew that they were hopelessly deadlocked.

I believe 100% that Spector is guilty and I hope he gets convicted in the next trial but I don't have faith that he will.

[anthony bauwens]

I think if he was in jail now awaiting his second trail they might call it time served allong with probation "substance abuse"..If this was a person with a average salarie or none hed be guilty. Thats our justice system..

[JJ]

Greetings to all: I just cannot believe SPECTOR IS OUT ON A MILLION DOLLAR BOND!!! I think he should have been jailed, if it was a local he or she would be behind bars!! You would hear Spector talk...........up a blue streak.
All you folks who have such faith in JUROR #10-HIS NAME IS BEN AND IS A NEIGHBOR OF SPECTOR!!!??? RED FLAG, I personally think he is arrogant, and obnoxious. I pray to God this trial moves faster than the last trial. I think the PROSECUTION DID THE BEST THEY COULD, AND YOU NEVER KNOW GOD FORBID YOU MAY NEED THEM TO HELP.

SPECTOR IS GUILTY AS SIN, I am sorry for his mental conditions, but that does not give him the RIGHT TO KILL. He will meet his Creator and there will be no attorney's bailing him out.

Hey Benjamin you should not have tried to sway the jurors!! GO DISTRICT ATTORNEYS ALL THE WAY THIS TIME, GET IN THE EVIDENCE THAT WAS NOT ALLOWED FIRST TIME AROUND.

Respectfully JJ

[JJ]

TO JL: KEEP THE FAITH, AND MAYBE WE WILL HEAR GOOD NEWS ON YOUR NEXT VISIT TO THE DOCTOR, PRAYERS FOR YOU.

STAY STRONG, AND GOD WILLING ENJOY THE HOLIDAYS.

jj

[kassandrasduplex]

Looks like Mr. Spector bought defense "experts" and a couple of jurors too...