So, over six years have passed since actress Lana Clarkson died from a gun shot wound at Phil Spector's Beverly Hills mansion, and this week, for the second time, lawyers for the prosecution and the legendary producer's defence will sum up their arguments- that Spector shot dead Clarkson in a typical late-night-loony moment, or that the depressive Clarkson shot herself - before the second jury tries their best to reach a verdict.
As much previously reported, the first time Spector was tried for the murder of Clarkson the jury reached a 10-2 deadlock in favour of conviction. Not enough for the court to pass a guilty verdict, a mistrial was declared leading to the second court hearing relating to the case that has been in full flow for the last few months. Media interest in the second case soon waned - including our own - when it became clear that both prosecution and defence would basically present the same arguments and, in the main, the same witnesses, to fight their respective cases.
Again the prosecution wheeled in various former girlfriends of Spector who confirmed that the producer had a split personality, and was prone to switch, often late at night, from the charmer they loved to an angry man who made violent threats towards women, often involving guns. They presented the producer's former chauffeur, who was outside Spector's house the night Clarkson was shot, and who claims his former boss said the words "I think I killed someone" shortly after gun fire had been heard. And they relied on various forensic experts who claims blood splatters and the like proved Spector must have been holding the gun.
The defence - although slightly more together under Doron Weinberg than the somewhat chaotic defence team who represented the producer first time round, and without the distraction of all those allegations that Spector's original defence attorneys hid potentially crucial evidence - also relied in the main on similar evidence to the first trial. They questioned the reliability of the chauffeur's testimony (they say there was a noisy fountain and the driver's English wasn't brilliant, meaning he could have easily misheard), brought in their own forensic experts who say the blood splatters actually show Clarkson shot herself, and then went through various correspondences of the late actress to show she was depressed and maybe even suicidal. Weinberg, in an interesting move, also provided evidence that Spector, when grumpy, made threats to men as well as women - an admission of Spector's ability to flip personality wise, but also an attempt to reduce the impact of the misogyny claims against the producer.
Closing arguments in the second case will be begin later today. It remains to be seen if this jury is able to reach a verdict. Given the 10-2 split, the prosecution clearly won the argument if not the case first time round, so it will be interesting to see if Weinberg's more cohesive defence case can turn that around.
That said, it is possible that Judge Larry Fidler, aware how similar the two cases have been in terms of evidence presented, if not media interest and sideline dramas, is concerned that another deadlock may occur. That would explain why on Friday the judge told the jury they could consider the lesser charge of involuntary manslaughter.
The jury first time round were not offered that option. Some have speculated that the two who opposed a guilty verdict last time may have been affected by the fact little discussion was made about Spector's intent during the trial, ie did he want Clarkson dead. The issue wasn't discussed because under Californian law it isn't a requirement that the producer intended to kill the actress in order to get a second degree murder conviction - ie an accidental shooting could still amount to murder if Spector had acting with sufficient negligence. His intent therefore was irrelevant. But juries often find the concept of a murder charge without an intent to kill a bit confusing.
Offering the manslaughter option may go in the prosecution's favour. Although they have always pushed for the full murder conviction, and while in theory the burden of proof for manslaughter is the same as murder, a manslaughter conviction is, in reality, easier to secure. For Spector a manslaughter conviction would result in a lesser penalty, but it would be a conviction nonetheless.
Closing arguments could last until Wednesday.