Phil Spector's defence lawyer Doron Weinberg returned to the bold statement used by the legendary producer's previous defence team right at the start of his first murder trial. "It's science that proves it, guvnor".
As you may remember, the then bullish original Spector defence team said that science was on their side as they began their client's defence over allegations that he shot dead actress Lana Clarkson at his Beverly Hills home back in 2003. Forensic evidence, they promised, would prove beyond doubt that Clarkson held the gun that killed her. Unfortunately the forensics bit of the defence's case got all caught up in allegations that their experts had removed crucial evidence from the crime scene, and as a result their star forensics witness - Henry Lee - refused to testify. As a result, their experts, who claimed the blood splatters etc proved Clarkson was holding the gun, were no more convincing than the prosecution's experts who argued the blood layout showed that Spector had held the gun.
But yesterday, as he presented his closing arguments at the second Spector trial, defence man Doron Weinberg again said scientific evidence "proved" Clarkson pulled the trigger of the gun that killed her. He proceeded to list no less than fourteen forensic details - blood splatter, gunshot residue, DNA etc - which he said proved his point. "Every single fact" he concluded "says this is a self-inflicted gunshot wound. How do you ignore it? How do you say this could have been a homicide?"
Responding to the prosecution's emphasis on Spector's past gun-wielding run-ins with former girlfriends, run-ins which, the prosecution said, proved the producer was a "demonic maniac", Weinberg said the prosecutors had had to rely on "drama and accusations" to construct a case against his client, but he urged the jury to "start with the science and forensics".
Referencing the prosecution's other big testimony, by Spector's former driver, who claims the producer said "I think I killed someone" shortly after he'd heard gun fire inside his then boss's home, Weinberg reportedly continued: "If you knew only what the case looks like from the outside, you'd say 'it sure looks like he did it'. If you believe (his chauffeur), you'd probably fold your arms and say, 'Looks like he did it'. Mr Spector did not kill Lana Clarkson. That's what the evidence shows".
Of course the prosecution also presented forensic evidence which they claim proves their case, so it remains to be seen if Weinberg's albeit dramatic presentation of "the science" is enough to win Spector an acquittal. The jury are expected to begin their deliberations later today. As previously reported, unlike the jury in the first trial, this lot have been given the option of convicting Spector of involuntary manslaughter if they aren't satisfied the prosecution proved murder, but don't believe Weinberg and the producer's argument that Clarkson took her own life.