The defence in the Phil Spector murder trial has conditionally rested, and all without a Phil Spector testimony – a shame as, since he was there when Lana Clarkson died, Spector could have helped clear up the whole suicide/ murder thing.
But it's not to be. Even though it can still pull in a few witnesses if it wants to, Phil Spector's defence conditionally rested yesterday as the prosecution carried on hauling up women who Phil Spector used to point guns at now and again. However, the question on everyone's lips is why won't Phil Spector testify? The Phil Spector murder trial has been so bogged down in tedious speculation about various blood spatter theories that a heartfelt testimony from the accused himself might refocus everyone on the notion that Phil Spector is innocent. Then again it might descend into a lengthy explanation about where Phil Spector buys his child-sized middle-aged lesbian cruise-wear costumes from, which would probably have the opposite effect.
As it stumbles to a conclusion, it seems to be pretty clear that the Phil Spector murder trial hasn't been the epic, front-page blockbuster people thought it would be – more like a series of dryly conflicting scientific theories livened up by intermittent usage of the word 'cunt'. The prosecution wheeled in so many women who claimed that Phil Spector held guns to their heads that it stopped being interesting long ago, and the defence has rammed the argument that Lana Clarkson was depressed enough to kill herself down our throats so much that the only people left honestly contemplating suicide are the people who have been following the Phil Spector murder trial in the first place.
Seriously, you know when a trial is on its last legs when family members of the victim and suspect are called in to discuss how much their relatives liked shoes or what hand they write with. Of course, there is one thing that would drag the Phil Spector murder trial out of the doldrums, and that's a testimony by Phil Spector himself. As the only surviving witness of Lana Clarkson's death, Phil Spector could have given his first-hand version of events and turned the case around. Phil Spector could have reiterated what a puny midget he is, shot down claims that he told his driver that he killed someone and introduced the notion that he only wanted to shoot all women in the head… with love.
Anyway, that's not going to happen because Phil Spector's defence has conditionally rested without ever letting the jury hear Phil Spector's testimony, as CNN reports:
Without the jury present, Superior Court Judge Larry Paul Fidler required Spector to acknowledge that he agreed with his attorneys' announcement that he would not be taking the witness stand. "Mr. Spector, you need to have me explain to you and you need to understand … the defense as a matter of strategy for whatever reason has indicated to me they are not calling you as a witness. That right is solely yours," Fidler said. "Understanding that, do you wish to waive and give up your right to testify in this matter?" "Yes," Spector said in a hushed voice.
So that's it. Without his testimony, Phil Spector's defence rests on the following facts: 1) Phil Spector is a small righthanded man, 2) Lana Clarkson didn't like her job very much, and 3) some people during the French revolution crawled about for a minute or two after their heads were cut off according to a book someone once read. Sounds fair enough to us – we'll order the doves in for Phil Spector's acquittal.
Read more:
Ketterman says
Showing some love to this topic “new to this wordpress”. I defiantly agree with it also. If you really think about it than it all makes alot of sense