The long running Phil Spector murder trial is not a simple story of "a vulnerable victim against the evil madman" as the prosecution may have had you believe. Not my words, but the words of Linda Kenney-Baden, the defence lawyer charged with the task of summing up for the accused as this high profile trial reaches its final stages. "What the government wants you to believe," she continued, "is that Phil Spector is a bad man and therefore he shot her. They want you to hate him and supplant the facts of this case with that hatred. They want you to use emotion to convict Phil Spector rather than rely on the scientific evidence that clearly exonerates him".
As much previously reported, Spector is accused of shooting dead Lana Clarkson at his Beverly Hills home back in February 2003. Spector claims Clarkson shot herself. Kenney-Baden was given the task of summing up for Spector after the legendary producer's original lead lawyer, Bruce Cutler, pulled out of the case last week. She had to follow an impressive performance from chief prosecution lawyer Alan Jackson, who told the court room on Wednesday: "She [Clarkson] was murdered once on February 3rd 2003, by Phillip Spector when he put a gun in her mouth and that gun went off. Her character has been assassinated over the last four months through the presentation of the defense evidence, attempting to paint her in a way that simply isn't true".
Kenney-Baden returned to the defence's two main arguments - that Clarkson was depressed to the level of being suicidal in the days before her death, and that the forensics clear Spector of any involvement in her death. The prosecution, she argued, had had to resort to "theatrics" because of the lack of science behind their case against the producer. They had, she argued, relied on "accusations and demonisations rather than showing you what evidence they have that proves their case beyond a reasonable doubt".
On the strongest bit of evidence the prosecution did have, the testimony of Spector's former chauffeur, who says Spector said to him shortly after the shooting "I think I killed somebody", Kenny-Baden again stressed that English was the Brazilian driver's second language, and that given the noise coming from a fountain in Spector's courtyard, a car radio playing and music coming from the house, the potential for mishearing was high. "Mr De Souza had the classic problem of a lot of witnesses," she concluded, "he was simply mistaken".
Responding to one of the key themes of Jackson's summation on Wednesday, that the defence's roll call of forensic experts had all been bought by millionaire Spector to speak in his favour, she continued: "For all their talk about a chequebook defense, it is the government who has a combined budget of billions of dollars. They had every forensic tool available to them as to who fired the gun that night - every forensic tool, every scientist, a crime lab, thousands of investigators".
The defence concluded by arguing that the prosecution continue to be unclear as to what exactly their theories are as to how Spector could have shot Clarkson, claiming that they had resorted to all kinds of speculation in a bid to prove their argument. Responding to Jackson's claim on Wednesday that it didn't matter whether Spector had set off the gun by mistake, and that it could have gone off because of an earth quake, Kenney-Baden said: "Some of [their speculation] you heard yesterday, including: The gun fell into her mouth. She was talking and he put the gun in her mouth. She screamed and he put the gun in her mouth. It even got to the point [where] a big gust of wind or an earthquake could have made the gun go off. It must have been San Andreas' fault".
The defense will continue its closing remarks today. The prosuection will then get a rebuttal before the jury being deliberation. That may begin later today, or could kick off on Monday.