Rose speaks

Prosecution Witnesses:

#10: Sonjia Holguin (waitress who served Spector at the House of Blues; testimony completed)

#11: Euphrathes Anthony Lalonvriz (Security trainer at the House of Blues; testimony completed)

#12 Melissa Grosvenor (1101(b) witness who was held at gunpoint in Spector’s Pasadena home)

Accredited Press inside the courtroom:
Harriet Ryan of the Los Angeles Times (about an hour in the afternoon session)

I miss the 8:29 am train this morning. Going down the escalator I realize I forgot to take a sweater again and I forgot to bring a bottle of water. When I get a seat on the train, there is a woman in the seat directly behind me. She has headphones on and she is singing, badly. This is going to be an interesting (and auditorialy painful) 1/2 hour ride. When the train starts up I’m fortunate. The sound drowns out the weak wailing of the American Idol wannabe.

In the first floor elevator bay, Pat Kelly from the PIO and I chat about where I can get any public case documents or motions. She tells me that normally they would be on the mezzanine level but since the case is in court the easiest would be to just ask the prosecutors for a copy of the document. It takes us about five tries before we are able to get on an elevator.

The courtroom is almost empty. There’s no accredited press and no attorneys with Mrs. Clarkson and Fawn. There are two gentlemen in the gallery on my left. Spector’s #1 fan is here. Weinberg’s male clerk is covering computer exhibits duty today. Spector is wearing a black pinstripe jacket, black pants a black shirt and a white kerchief. There are black shoes on his feet. Rachelle is wearing the black form fitted short satin jacket again with a midnight blue satin shirt. From here, her pants look like they have multicolored pin stripes, but I’m sure that’s not right. They are too long, too; the pant cuffs are dragging on the floor. Over that she is wearing one of her long, worn sweater coats.

Wendy and AJ and Truc chat. At 9:37 am the jury is called and the bailiff calls out for people in the gallery to turn off their cell phones and pagers. For a short time, the courtroom appears that it’s a bit warmer today. The DA’s clerks arrive. I notice two of the alternates take out wool looking shawls and wrap them around their shoulders when they sit down. Juror #5 is wearing another music related t-shirt. It’s black with an image and the words Johnny Cash. The rest of the men are wearing button down or polo shirts. A juror in the back row has a coughing fit, but she’s fine.

Sophia is up on the stand, under cross examination.

Ms. Holguin’s cross is not as painful as some of the 1101(b) witnesses. Many times however, she answer’s Weinberg’s questions with I don’t remember that, I don’t know or I don’t recall.

To read the ongoing coverage of Sprocket on the Phil Spector retrial, take 2 visit Sprocket’s site.

http://sprocket-trials.blogspot.com/2008/11/phil-spector-retrial-day-eight-of.html.

©Sprocket
November 19, 2008
Used with the permission of Sprocket – crime “junkie” trial watcher - writer
All Rights Reserved, do not reproduce in whole or in part without the express written consent of the author.

The expressions in this blog article are based on the opinions of our featured author, Sprocket, please remember we are not lawyers and those opinions expressed here are each of our individual opinions and should not be taken as legal advice and/or legal opinions. The comments following this blog article are the opinions and sole property of the blog site members and do not necessarily reflect those of the site owners.

Please also read our Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy.

Tags: Euphrathes Anthony Lalonvriz, Harriet Ryan, Lana Clarkson, Lana Clarkson murder trial, Lana Clarkson retrial, Lana Clarkson trial, Melissa Grosvenor, Phil Spector, Phil Spector "alleged" murder retrial, Phil Spector "alleged" murder trial, Phil Spector - Lana Clarkson trial, Phil Spector retrial, Phil Spector trial, Rachelle Spector, Sonjia Holguin, Sprocket coverage of the Phil Spector retrial, Sprokect

In Los Angeles California, today will begin the trial of Lori Drew for “Violating the Terms of Service of My Space.com”. When you read that sentence, I think we all go WTH, violate the terms of service of an internet site and go to jail? Yet in the Landmark case of the government vs. Lori Drew that is exactly what is happening and it could change the internet world forever.

Prosecutors in Los Angeles will try to prove that Drew knew she was breaking the Terms of Service of the social networking website MySpace.com by creating a fictitious 16-year-old heartthrob named Josh Evans to woo, then humiliate a minor girl to the point she killed herself. The ultimate Cyber Bully, but is this trial fair to the rest of us that could be affected forever by this case.

As a headline in a newspaper in Australia said yesterday, this could result in something to the affect of, “Say goodbye to anonymity on the web.” The online paper goes on to say:

“So what did they charge with?

How about ‘conspiracy and fraudulently gaining access to someone else’s computer’.

Yup … that’s it and as much of a twist of the laws as it might be this is exactly what they got indictments against Ms. Drew which has more than a few legal scholars a little worried. The one thing that was in Lori Drew’s favour though was that the judge hearing the case had originally said that any evidence relating to … suicide would be excluded from the trial. Considering that the young girl’s death had nothing to do with whether any computer fraud laws were broken this made sense.

Unfortunately, though the judge has now reverse his decision and this evidence will be allowed. In light of how emotionally charged this whole matter is evidence such as this will make it very hard for a fair trial to be heard on the charge of computer fraud; as that is the only charge against Lori Drew.

So how does this affect any use of anonymous accounts or aliases?”

After months of many of us saying that this was a horrible example of an adult bullying a child but it did not meet the criteria of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act and would never see a courtroom we have now been proved wrong and the trial of Lori Drew begins today. In recent weeks U. S. District Judge George Wu appeared to have agreed with most of our armchair take in this with his initial hints of rulings to be expected with comments leaning toward either dismissing the case outright or barring prosecutors from mentioning the death of the minor child. However, on Friday, Judge Wu stunned a globe of sites/forums/blogs following the case by deciding that the case would go forward, suicide and all. In an irony he mentioned a Law and Order television program on NBC called SVU that had a segment last week based on the Lori Drew case.

Dean Steward, Drew’s lawyer had said that if the suicide of the girl was allowed into the trial that the jury would convict his client, himself and anyone sitting near him. Perhaps he maybe closer then he might think in that assessment with the Pro Bono Expert Orin Kerr deciding he could not attend the trial citing that this is the last week of classes at George Town University on the East Coast after paying the fee to appear Pro Hac Vice to represent Drew.

The case against Drew marks the first time the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act has been used to pursue allegations of cyber bullying rather than computer “hackers”, those whom have intentionally access a computer without access or exceeds the access they know they have to take something from that computer or network.

State and local governments have passed laws to address cyber bullying, in part out of frustration after local, state and federal prosecutors in Missouri stated they could not find a statute to try Drew under. NO ONE is claiming that cyber bullying is not a horrible phenomenal effect on the world web net where anonymity is the rule of the day and thereby allows bullies to do things they would seldom think of doing face to face. There are federal laws pending in congress to address cyber bullying now pending for the new congress to take up next year.

Why is Drew then being tried in Los Angeles? Federal prosecutors in Los Angeles tried the computer fraud approach, claiming jurisdiction because MySpace.com’s computer servers are in that court’s district.

The statute being used has been challenged so extensively in pretrial motions that many of us have predicted the trial would never take place and more people on the internet then ever before understands what “hacking” is. It does not mean what many of us thought of the old vision of someone “hacking” into a site to take it down so in that respect this case has served as a teaching tool to millions of internet users.

Per one of the best articles outlining the case out of Saint Louis, Missouri, it restates in easy to understand language the basis of what the government has to prove including all four parts of the Computer Fraud act of:

“That Drew “intentionally accessed a computer without authorization or in excess of authorization.
That the access involved interstate communication.
That Drew obtained information that way.
That it was done “in furtherance of a tortious act in violation of the laws of any State.” In this case, the alleged tort is the intentional infliction of emotional distress, with the suicide as proof.”

The government’s case hinges on the fact that Drew violated the MySpace “terms of service,” which prohibit lying when registering, or soliciting information from someone under 18 and/or harassing other users. As we have noted almost all sites, including Rose Speaks.com has Terms of Service and a Privacy Statement as does others sites examples of TMZ.com, MySpace.com, Topix.net and thousands of other online forums/sites/blogs.

The article in the Saint Louis papers states in part, “To prove the elements of emotional distress, prosecutors normally would have to show the conduct was intentional and “beyond all possible bounds of decency, and to be regarded as atrocious, and utterly intolerable in a civilized community.”

If Drew is convicted, each charge carries a potential penalty of five years in prison. Judge Wu did rule however that the jury could find her guilty of a misdemeanor charge of unauthorized access to a protected computer that would mean much less than a year, and possibly probation for Drew.

The girl who committed suicide father, Ron Meier, is in Los Angeles, where he says he will stay until the end of the trial.

Per the Saint Louis newspaper article, “Meier did say that a guilty verdict and even minor punishment would be enough if it came with a broader awareness of cyber bullying.”

I think we all hope that laws that fit the crime as many here at Rose Speaks.com knows address cyber bullying. It has become almost insane in nature as to how some of our members and moderators have been stalked online and have had everything about their private lives that can be dug up put out on the internet to scare and/or harass them.

We are hoping one of our Los Angeles Court Watchers will be writing on this case from inside the courtroom this week so stay tuned to Rose Speaks.com for the latest in coverage of the USA vs. Lori Drew.

You can pick up all of the papers in the Lori Drew Case in our download section Opened to ALL not just registered members.

©Rose Turner
November 18, 2008
All Rights Reserved, do not reproduce in whole or in part without the express written consent of the author.

This article is the sole property of Rose Speaks unless otherwise stated. This article as with other articles is based on the opinion of Rose Turner, or our guest authors if so indicated. Please remember we are not lawyers and those opinions expressed here are each of our individual opinions and should not be taken as legal advice and/or legal opinions. The comments following this article are the opinions and sole property of the site members and do not necessarily reflect those of the site owners.

Please also read our Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy.

Tags: Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, Cyber Bullying, Dean Steward, Josh Evans, Judge George Wu, Judge Wu, Lori Drew, MySace.com, MySpace Cyber Bully case, Orin Kerr, Orin S. Kerr, Ron Meier, TMZ.com, Topix.com, U. S. District Judge George Wu

Prosecution Witnesses
#8: Dianne Ogden (1101(b) witness; unavailable for trial; testimony was the video recording by Court TV during the first trial; testimony completed)

#9: Kathy Sullivan (waiter at The Grill on the Alley; after work, she went to Trader Vic’s, Dan Tana’s and the House of Blues with Spector; testimony completed)

#10: Sonjia Holguin (waitress who served Spector at the House of Blues; direct testimony completed; cross tomorrow)

Special Hearing Outside the Presence of the Jury (Requested by Doron Weinberg)

#3 Judge Douglas Sortino (From 2002-2005, prosecutor assigned to the Spector case)

Accredited Press inside the courtroom:
Afternoon session only, Harriet Ryan from the Los Angeles Times; Beth Karas from CNN In Session (unofficial capacity)

Some quick news for those of you who have been waiting for the main stream press to put out another article on this case.

Dianne Odgen testified from beyond the grave today. Her video taped testimony, preserved by the former Court TV was played for the jury. Over the objections of Weinberg, the jury was give a redacted copy of the transcript of the tape to read as the video played.

Fidler gave the jurors a brief introduction to the video tape explaining that there were blacked out areas of the tape and that they were not to speculate on the reason for that. A few minutes into the tape it’s stopped and Ms. Do asks the court to explain to the jury about the blue screen. Fidler goes onto explain about the different attorneys and their different style and tone and the way they present or cross witnesses. They are not to be concerned with that; just the content. It’s at this point that Juror #1 asks if they could keep the transcript copy to write on. Judge Fidler says yes. “People?” Fidler asks. AJ states they have no objection. Weinberg objects. Fidler notes his objection and tells him he is overruled.

There was quite a bit of redaction and black out on the tape. Any time the camera zoomed in on Spector, those images were blanked out and although you heard the audio, the video went to a blue screen. Noticeably absent was Cutler yelling at Odgen about the purse on her shoulder incident and Judge Fidler admonishing him. (Later, I verified with AJ that he had a battle over that. He had to edit it out.) After the tape was finished (it went for approximately two hours) Weinberg made a motion about this testimony, objecting to the cross examination. “I’ve never been involved in a case where, the prosecution decided on the cross of the witness. [..] It was highly offensive in many ways.” Weinberg goes onto say that because of Cutler’s style of cross, he was severed from the case and never presented another witness to the jury again. He went onto say, “And now we are associated with it. Move for a mistrial.”

To read the ongoing coverage of Sprocket on the Phil Spector retrial, take 2 visit Sprocket’s site.

http://sprocket-trials.blogspot.com/2008/11/phil-spector-retrial-day-seven-of.html.

©Sprocket
November 18, 2008
Used with the permission of Sprocket – crime “junkie” trial watcher - writer
All Rights Reserved, do not reproduce in whole or in part without the express written consent of the author.

The expressions in this blog article are based on the opinions of our featured author, Sprocket, please remember we are not lawyers and those opinions expressed here are each of our individual opinions and should not be taken as legal advice and/or legal opinions. The comments following this blog article are the opinions and sole property of the blog site members and do not necessarily reflect those of the site owners.

Please also read our Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy.

Tags: Beth Karas - CNN In Session, Dianne Ogden, Doron Weinberg, Harriet Ryan - Los Angeles Times, Judge Douglas Sortino, Kathy Sullivan, Lana Clarkson, Lana Clarkson murder retrial, Lana Clarkson trial of Phil Spector, Phil Spector, Phil Spector - Lana Clarkson "allege" murder retrial, Phil Spector retrial, Sonjia Holguin, Sprocket

…I drove into the parking lot this evening to have dinner with the star of an upcoming new series on CBS and my son. Now this parking lot is attached to this so-called “Studio City’s Favorite,” and the last time I was here you could park for free…well these kings of milking you of every dime found a new way to dig even deeper into your wallet, now you get to pay for parking. Then Hose A and Hose B put up a fight about letting me park myself. Well, I am not cheap but no one parks my Bentley, no one. Most smart establishments don’t want the liability of parking one of these autos (Huh, this place is not smart). The yellow carpet service does not stop in the parking lot, it continues inside…you know the rule, dirty restrooms = often dirty restaurant and shitty attitude in the parking lot or at the door will carry on inside also, NEVER FAILS! Well I go in and ask to speak to the manager and tell him of my encounter with these two idiots in their parking lot and he tells me, “they don’t work for us anyways.” Note: If you park in this lot and something happens get ready to be told that it is not their problem. And as for the entertainment in this place it is as good as the food…STINKS. …The only thing that this place is known for it is where Robert Blake took his soon to be DEAD WIFE for dinner before someone shot her in the head! Hmm, could it have been after having a plate of this dive’s greasy food that she shot herself in the head for being so stupid for even eating here? Well, after getting the yellow carpet treatment we are not so stupid, we leave.

Sooooo, we go over to Caioti Pizza Cafe, 4346 Tujunga Ave, Studio City, Ca. It is across from the carnival lit signage dump called Vitello’s. We were greeted promptly and you got the feeling that they really wanted you to come in and eat. …

…Friends, do yourself a favor and skip Vitello’s and go to a place where fresh and friendly is the rule of thumb. Caioti has been around for 14 years…I am telling you to visit once and you will see why.

Vitello’s? Visit once and try and figure out how they have lasted and why are you sitting in this dump on Toojoonga.

To read the rest of John J. Nazarian’s night out and rating of restaurants visit his site, it is well worth the read.

http://desperateexes.com/2008/11/17/vitellos-yuk-caioti-yum/.

©An Editorial Opinion by John J. Nazarian
November 17, 2008
Used with the permission of John Nazarian P. I. – Part Time Chef and writer Extraordinaire
All Rights Reserved, do not reproduce in whole or in part without the express written consent of the author.

The expressions in this blog article are based on the opinions of our featured author, John Nazarian, please remember we are not lawyers and those opinions expressed here are each of our individual opinions and should not be taken as legal advice and/or legal opinions. The comments following this blog article are the opinions and sole property of the blog site members and do not necessarily reflect those of the site owners.

Please also read our Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy.

Tags: Caioti Pizza Cafe, John J. Nazarian, John J. Nazarian P.I, Studio City California Restaurants, Vitello’s

Will Pellicano and Crew ever be sentenced? This is becoming a little like a bad meal that keeps giving hours after eating it! Or one of those horror flicks that the villain after getting hit with bombs, being blown to pieces and being finely chopped in a blender keeps returning. Yup, “The King of Omerta” is not done yet, he wants lawyers to review this segment of the game he has long lost! NOW he wants a lawyer?!? Sentencing postponed again.

What is nice about this new date — December 15, 2008 at 1:30 P.M. in courtroom 840 — is that it will be the Pellicano and Crew show, making it all the more entertaining. I can hear it all now like a boxing match: And sitting in this corner wearing a stupid look on his face is…

To read the rest of John J. Nazarian’s unique view on the Terry Christensen and Anthony Pellicano trial click the link below.

http://desperateexes.com/2008/11/15/pellicano-trial-main-event-postponed/.

©John J. Nazarian
November 16, 2008
Used with the permission of John Nazarian P. I. – writer Extraordinaire
All Rights Reserved, do not reproduce in whole or in part without the express written consent of the author.

The expressions in this blog article are based on the opinions of our featured author, John Nazarian, please remember we are not lawyers and those opinions expressed here are each of our individual opinions and should not be taken as legal advice and/or legal opinions. The comments following this blog article are the opinions and sole property of the blog site members and do not necessarily reflect those of the site owners.

Please also read our Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy.

Tags: Abner Nicherie, Anthony Peillicano trial, Anthony Pellicano, Da Sarge Arnenson, Desperate Exes, Desperateexes.com, John J. Nazarian, John J. Nazarian P.I, Little Abner” Nicherie, Mark Arneson, Pellicano Trial, Ray Turner, Tony Pellicano

There has been a lot of discussion forwarded to me from Topix.net and other sites, alleging that they know what Howard K. Stern settled for in Florida. In part, it is being said that L. Lin Wood was the one to “rush to settle with John O’Quinn and The O’Quinn Law Firm. That Wood settled for just his legal fees to be paid. There is to be no apology or acknowledgement to Howard K. Stern for the falsity or wrongful accusations of murdering Anna Nicole Smith or her son Daniel Smith; holding Dannielynn hostage and that Stern did not even recover enough money, after Wood gets his share, to get a pair of shoes”. What is up about a damn pair of shoes all of the time? This must be an inside joke that I am missing but it appears on every discussion blog/forum/board when ever money and Stern are mentioned together. Why is the term “murderer” still floating all over the internet on forums and topic boards when the suit where the allegations originated is now supposed to be settled in principal?

The other thing that is going around Topix.net and other sites is that L. Lin Wood ALWAYS settles out of court because he does not win litigation if it goes to a jury and has a horrible record of losses when he has attempted to try a case to completion. So let’s play the game of What’s My Record (yes a Rose Speaks original game), and then throw in the term I so love, “let Google be your friend”. Remember when playing this game that good lawyers settle at least 80% of lawsuits out of court. If what is being alleged on Topix.net and other sites has a scintilla of truth, does Powell Goldstein LLP or Bryan Cave LLP have any good trial lawyers? If either firm does have good trial litigators would they add them to Stern’s legal team at this point in the “game”?

My challenge for you if you so choose to accept, (yes a take off on “Mission Impossible” wording), research and tell us what percentage if ANY of cases won by Wood if he goes to trial with a case. Does he win none, does he win some, does he win less that 5%, let us know.

On an update, there was no papers filed in the Florida Court on Friday, November 14 of a joint stipulation of settlement and joint Motion to Dismiss, perhaps Stern has decided he wants “one new pair of shoes” since that seems to be the topic of Topix.net and other sites.

Share with us what you find on L. Lin Wood winning in front of a jury if that is available on the world wide net, and I will check PACER and let you know what I find over the years say since 1990 to present tried to a jury verdict and if tried to a jury verdict the percentage appealed.

©Rose Turner
November 15, 2008
All Rights Reserved, do not reproduce in whole or in part without the express written consent of the author.

This article is the sole property of Rose Speaks unless otherwise stated. This article as with other articles is based on the opinion of Rose Turner, or our guest authors if so indicated. Please remember we are not lawyers and those opinions expressed here are each of our individual opinions and should not be taken as legal advice and/or legal opinions. The comments following this article are the opinions and sole property of the site members and do not necessarily reflect those of the site owners.

Please also read our Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy.

Tags: Anna Nicole Smith, Anna Nicole Smith Estate, Bryan Cave LLP, Daniel Smith, Dannielynn, Dannielynn Birkhead, Howard K Stern, John O'Quinn, L. Lin Wood, Larry Birkhead, Lin Wood, POGO, Powell Goldstein LLP, The John O'Quinn Law Firm, The O'Quinn Law Firm, Virgie Arthur

November 13th, 2008 (unfinished entry to be updated)

Prosecution Witnesses:

#6: Rommie Davis (High school friend who had dinner with Spector the evening of February 2nd, 2003; testimony completed)

#7: Stephanie Jennings (1101(b) witness, Carlyle Hotel incident; testimony completed)

Special Hearing Outside the Presence of the Jury: (Requested by Doron Weinberg)

#1 Detective Richard Tomlin (Los Angeles County Sheriff, testimony completed)

#2 Brian Bennett (Los Angeles County District Attorney Investigator, testimony completed)

It was another grueling day but not as long as yesterday.

I was in the courtroom pretty early. Jon has been kind enough to drop me off in front of the courthouse before he parks his car. For a time, I am the only person in the gallery. At 9:30 am, the Clarkson family arrives.

Rommie Davis is sitting at the very end of the first row. I was wrong; she will be the first witness up today. I resist the temptation to tell Rommie Davis that she and I know someone in common. One of my dearest friends for over 20 years, Sandra Kaplan, went to high school with Ms. Davis and knew her and Phil Spector. I’ve had many conversations with my friend about Spector. She’s had nothing but fond memories of him at that time. She also told me about the high school reunions and how Spector used to sit at a table by himself with quite a few bodyguards. I’ll try to see if I can get some more high school reunion stories out of my friend in the coming weeks.

Spector is wearing a black, sort of charcoal suit, white shirt and vibrant blue tie. (Here is a photo of Spector and Rachelle leaving court today. I don’t believe he was wearing the big button in court. He must have added that later.) At 9:34 am, one of the PIO staff arrives.

Weinberg wants to raise an issue about Rommie Davis’s testimony, and she is asked to step outside. Weinberg addresses the court. I don’t have his statement exact but this is close. The last time she testified at trial she offered previous testimony about drinking [on the other nights and that testimony] is irrelevant. [He] doesn’t feel she should be allowed to testify about Spector taking medications. Her objective testimony is okay, but the time she left his company…..

To read the ongoing coverage of Sprocket on the Phil Spector retrial, take 2 visit Sprocket’s site.

http://sprocket-trials.blogspot.com/2008/11/phil-spector-retrial-day-six-of.html.

©Sprocket
November 14, 2008
Used with the permission of Sprocket – crime “junkie” trial watcher - writer
All Rights Reserved, do not reproduce in whole or in part without the express written consent of the author.

The expressions in this blog article are based on the opinions of our featured author, Sprocket, please remember we are not lawyers and those opinions expressed here are each of our individual opinions and should not be taken as legal advice and/or legal opinions. The comments following this blog article are the opinions and sole property of the blog site members and do not necessarily reflect those of the site owners.

Please also read our Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy.

Tags: Brian Bennett, Detective Richard Tomlin, Doron Weinberg, Lana Clarkson, Lana Clarkson murder retrial, Phil Spector, Phil Spector - Lana Clarkson "allege" murder, Phil Spector retrial, Rachelle Spector, Rommie Davis, Sandra Kaplan, Sprocket, Sprocket coverage of Phil Spector retrial, Stephanie Jennings