Kudos to L.A. County Deputy D.A. Alan Jackson for a case well tried, regardless of the jury verdict, in the case against Phil Spector.

I don't normally follow trials on TV, watch lawyer/police/csi-type shows, or even read lawyer fiction books, but this is one of those hard fought trials that deserves attention by those of us who want to learn from a great prosecutor.

Alan most likely doesn't read our forum, but if he did, I'd tell him "Job Well Done!" in a very difficult factual trial with so many defense hijinks to deal with. Alan has dealt with those hijinks admirably, ethically, courteously, and where called for, in an aggresive unabashed truth seeking manner. As many of us know, the presence of the media and a filmed trial only makes our job more difficult, and again, he and his partner and co-workers have really tried a good case.

In his closing, Alan used something I and others have often used in murder and other violent crime cases, in response to reasonable doubt arguments. That is the "If you could transport yourself back in time to immediately before the murder/crime, would you ntercede with or warn the victim...if you would, then there is no reasonable doubt".

I learned that from a Harris County prosecutor, whose name I have now forgotten, in the 80's while watching a trial in Houston. I thought it was a very good response to reasonable doubt.

Here's a few excepts from an excellent closing, and a video link to this part of Alan's closing.

From Court TV:
"There were several dramatic moments, including one near the start of his argument where he asked the panelists to imagine they could travel back in time and speak to Clarkson in the moment before she got in his car.

"If you can say but one thing, one sentence, two words, even if you had to whisper it, what would you say?" the prosecutor asked.

Cupping his hands around his mouth and leaning close to the rail, he stage-whispered, "Don't go. Don't go. You'd simply say, 'Lana, don't go."

TDCAA'ers, here's the link to the video of Alan in his closing argument referencing this point.(the set up is great, and at about 2:35 seconds into the video clip, Alan hits the water without a splash, a perfect "10" of closing argument response to reasonable doubt).

http://www.courttv.com/video/player.html?videoSrc=/video/clipdata/spector/090507_stateclosing1#link=nvpeaf

More from Court TV:

"As the jurors stared wordlessly back at him, Jackson said he was convinced "everybody in this jury box" would speak the same words "because you know something she didn't know. You know the real Phil Spector."

"You know in your heart of hearts he is responsible for her death ... he killed her," the prosecutor said."

Alan goes on to make fine arguments regarding the testimony of the "experts" in this trial, and the issues of evidence disappearing that led apparently to Dr. Henry Lee not hitting the stand:


From Court TV:

"Jackson spent much of his summation attacking the evidence presented by Spector's team. He called it a "checkbook defense" and said of Spector's witnesses, both expert and lay, "It's nothing more than a pay to say. If you pay it, I will say it."

The prosecutor said expert scientific witnesses, including Kenney-Baden's husband, Dr. Michael Baden, were bent on helping the defense instead of offering objective scientific opinions.

"If you hire enough lawyers who hired enough experts who are paid enough money, you can get them to say just about anything," he said.

He noted that criminalist Dr. Henry Lee was touted in opening statements by the defense, but was not called as a witness. Jackson reminded jurors that Lee had also been accused by a former defense attorney of hiding or destroying evidence from the death scene.

The prosecutor saved his bitterest scorn for Baden, the attorney's husband and the originator of a controversial defense theory that Clarkson lived for several minutes after her death. The theory, which Baden debuted near the end of the trial, offers a possible benign explanation for Clarkson's blood on his clothes.

He said the pathologist was involved in a "battle of the vows" pitting his oath to tell the truth on the witness stand against more long-lasting marital promises.

"With a conflict that brazen, how can you possibly put stock in what Dr. Baden said?" Jackson told jurors."

I am reminded of an adage I particularly like, one that former Harris County Assistant DA Sid Crowley used to oft repeat, which he got from a former Harris County District Judge (again, whose name I cannot remember but apparently who was famous or infamous for this saying in the 70's and 80's):

REASONABLE DOUBT - WHERE THE GUILTY HANG OUT

I always thought that would be a great name for a bar. Maybe some current or former Harris County ADA's can fill me in on which district judge used to say that phrase.

you're right, that would be an awesome name for a bar.

Thanks GG. Kudos to you for sharing this awesome post.

Yes, this guy is a bad ass. I came home for lunch the other day and was watching part of his argument on Court TV. He said something to the jury about being a die-hard Longhorn fan, which was gutsy to say in a Southern California courtroom.

Hook 'em, and I'm wondering if they'll be selling Phil Spector Halloween costumes this year. His appearance is truly frightening.

They've got a Gallery, Johnny, on Court TV that features some of Phil's hair-do's during the trial. I especially like the super-blow-out natural that he was sportin early in the Trial.

Does anyone think any of that hair is actually Phil's?

Ah Greg,
You've just got a bad case of hair envy!

i'm sure the specter's hair is the result of frosted hair plugs.