People Features
Phil Spector Trial, Michael Bay's latest 'Pie'buster
By Stone Martindale Aug 7, 2007, 5:31 GMT
Michael Bay testifies about his working relationship with actress Lana Clarkson during Phil Spector\'s murder trial in Los Angeles, California, USA 06 August 2007. Spector, 67, is accused of fatally shooting 40-year-old Lana Clarkson in Feb. 2003. EPA/DAMIAN DOVARGANES / POOL
The trial that won't quit. Now the director of this summer's blockbuster "Transformers," Michael Bay, was called by prosecutors as a rebuttal witness to Punkin Pie Laughlin's damaging testimony at Phil Spector's murder trial on Monday.
Punkin had testified earlier in the trial actress Lana Clarkson was depressed over a party encounter with director Michael Bay about 10 days before she died in Spector's home in 2003.
Spector's attorneys say it was another sign that Clarkson was suicidal, leading her to shoot herself.
FOX LA-TV affiliate channel 11 reports Bay testified he remembered Clarkson, who described as "funny" from a time he cast her for a small role in a car commercial in 1998, but denied ever seeing her among the numerous other people at the Hollywood Hills party in late January 2003.
"If I disrespected her she probably would have slapped me," Bay said. "She was just that saucy." Bay called Punkin Pie Laughlin on his blog a "disgusting liar."
Laughlin testified last month that she accompanied Clarkson to the party. She said Clarkson tried to talk to Bay but returned in tears, saying he didn't acknowledge her.
Laughlin's testimony of the incident the party was the defense's heaviest indicator that it was Clarkson's depression that caused a suicide, not a murder by Spector's hand.
Under questioning by prosecutor Alan Jackson, Bay said he scoured his memory after he read of Clarkson's death, trying to figure out when he last saw her. He said he thought it was eight or nine months before she died but he could not remember the circumstances.
Defense attorney Brad Brunon noted that Bay had several projects after he met Clarkson. When he asked Bay if he had offered her a role in one of his movies, Bay retorted, "No. But I never offered Tom Hanks a part either."
Bay recalled that at Christmas 2002, he received a gift of chocolates from Clarkson along with a copy of a one-woman video she had produced to promote her career.
Asked by Brunon whether he gave the video any consideration, he said, "I didn't even look at it."
COMMENT
blog comments powered by DisqusLatest Headlines in People
- 1. Brooke Mueller returns to rehab
- 2. Gwyneth Paltrow's diaper dream
- 3. Stephen Moyer: Anna's pregnancy brings 'crazy'
- 4. Charlize Theron 'suspicious' of confidence
- 5. Brad and Angelina forced to move out of London home
Older Talkback
page: 1
Handguns are for killing people. Mr Spector loved the power over life that owning one gave him as he did most of his adult life. Everyone has a Phil Spector story about handguns. Tragedy occurs every day simply because we tolerate these devices in our society. We don't need them. I think Phil will likely lose this case but if we want to give some meaning to this tragedy of Miss Clarksons death how about banning handguns!
Hand guns do not kill anybody. People do. I suppose that you would want to outlaw knives too? Getting rid of handguns is like treating the symptoms of a disease, but not the cause of it. The guy should have been arrested years ago for assault with a deadly weapon, and put into jail then(He has pulled a gun on many people, including John Lennon). Money can buy you anything it seems. Remember that O.J. Simpson used a knife.
What spin! Bay's testimony actually supports Pie's testimony that
he failed to acknowledge Lana Clarkson at the party. Bay says he did not see her. So he admit not acknowledging Clarkson at the party. Bay probably did not recognize her. Not helpful to the DA at all. Anyone who is paying any attention to this trial knows Spector has already won acquittal. There is really no evidence of any substance whatsoever against him, and plenty to show that Clarkson was desperate, suicidal, and may well have grasped at her last chance for fame by committing suicide in Spector's home. It's a lesson to me. I am embarrassed to admit I thought he was probably guilty, too, but the DA has only succeeded in convincing me he is almost certainly factually innocent. I feel sorry for Clarkson and her family that the DA dragged her dirty laundry out in public in a pathetic attempt at fame and fortune.
Nina, You are a sick puppy.
I'm holding out faith that the justice system will convict Mr. Spector. Anyone who is suicidal screams it, either literally or through acting out. Lana was down, yes, but taking a minimum wage job shows real determination and self-reliance.
And now she was out with Phil Spector! Maybe this would be her lucky break! Lana Clarkson never gave up hope. She was murdered.
Handgun letter
I agree with Richard F. 100%. You take away handguns and guess what? Handgun crimes eventually disappear. In response to ‘paradox’: Yes, in essence handguns do kill people. If an unarmed person is in an uncomfortable situation, say a disagreement in a bar or confrontation on the street, he’s going to think twice before engaging an aggressor in a violent, physical exchange. It takes time to size up your opponent and make the calculations that are necessary before deciding whether it’s worth the risk. During that sizing up period, discretion usually seeps into the equation & influences any judgments made. Now, put a gun, the ‘great equalizer’, in that person’s hand and suddenly, his personality undergoes changes. Even the timid become less likely to be diplomatic, more willing to take risks and much more likely to use deadly force on an opponent. This can happen in the twinkling of an eye.
People can and will use knives to attack people, but keep in mind, that necessitates physical contact with an opponent, which will cause most people to take pause before attacking with one. It also takes a lot of effort to kill another person when guns aren’t involved. Unless you are very skilled in the use of knives, you’re likely to be in for quite a struggle before you actually kill an opponent with one. There’s also a very good chance that your opponent will take away your knife and use it against you. I know these things because I’ve had the misfortune of having jobs, (bouncer at a punker/biker bar and floor walker at a large retailer), where I’ve had to engage in periodic violent confrontations and run up against a multitude of weapons.
The point is that when a handgun enters the equation in any confrontation, discretion and judgment tend to take a back seat to anger and the ‘heat of the moment’. Life and death decisions and terrible, irreparable mistakes are made in an instant. We’ve endured a 200-year experiment with guns in America. It’s become abundantly clear and continues to be proven every day that we just can’t be trusted with them. If I owned a handgun, I would be the first in line to give it up if and when our government came to its senses and outlawed them.
This case has nothing to do with handgun laws!!!!
We have the right to bear arms.... we don't have the right to shoot people and when we do, we have laws and a system that will deal with them accordingly.
Nuclear weapons don't kill people; people do. So where is my God-given right to the WMD of my choice? Why can't I own them on my own property? Who knows when this world will be taken over by fanatics -- and when it does, I want real protection, not some cheesy AK-47.
if you want gun laws let's have birth laws as well.... Parenting skills and the environment we grow up in create violent idiots with no respect for human life.
Let's put a limit to how many teenage mothers (rural or inner city) that can have kids; after four or five they have their womb taken away! This will minimize our unsupervised idiot population churning out gun toting thugs.
mushroom... we have laws that limit and control what types of guns that we can own and use. I would assume WMD would fall into the bucket of unlawful ownership rules already in place.
Nina,
If ever a close friend of mine is murdered, I sure hope it is not you who sits on the jury trying the killer. It is obvious to anyone outside LaLa Land that Spector murdered this lady. Let me see. He made a confession to his driver. Almost one to the cops. It was his gun. He has a history of threatening women with guns. He is an obvious nut. There is plenty of evidence he messed with the scene before police arrived and continued even afterwards until suppressed by the officers, whose directions he was ignoring. He is unwilling to take the stand and relies on paid for experts to make weak explainations of the scene and suicide, when obviously he could explain exactly what occurred if it was anything other then he threatened this lady with a gun and it went off.
Please let's have some faith that highly paid shysters and rich people cannot make further mockery of our justice system. I am rooting for this jury to see through those immoral paid experts and come to the right conclusion. This poor lady was murdered and then lynched. First by Mr. Spector and then by his paid henchmen. The first event may have been an accident, though a grossly negligent and criminal one. The second shows the true nature of Mr. Spector and he should hang for it.
If banning handguns would make them disappear... then maybe we should pass a law against crack and heroin, because that would surely make them go away. Gee... it seems so easy doesn't it. Criminals kill other people... criminals break the law (that's why they're criminals)... passing a law against guns won't stop them. Jackholes!
lets face it, spector was playing around being a jerk the gun goes off
taking off most of this gals face, with his background it was bound to happen, why he didnot fess up to this, who knows? if he had he would be half way done with his sentence and almost home and getting on with his life, wether he is found guilty or not Lana's family will probaly file a lawsuit and hopefully win a wrongful death suit.
Tony, in regards to your statement about the right to bear arms.
What the second amendment actually says is; 'A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.'
Up until the 18th century the term 'to bear arms' dealt exclusively to military service. Not an individuals right to the ownership of firearms. Point of fact. There are over 30 instances of the use of the term 'to bear arms' or 'bearing arms' in bills, statutes, and debates of the Continental, Confederation, and United States' Congresses between 1774 and 1821. All of them deal exclusively with the military and not civilians.
More people will die from hand guns in the USA this year than American soldiers have died in Iraq since the start of that war.
Think about that.
Handguns were never designed as sporting weapons or hunting weapons. They were and still are designed exclusively to kill humans.
Shame on you! I thought it was a blog about Phil Spector's murder trial, and I take a peek and find it's a bashing forum against handgun ownership!
To Paradox: In England they used gas lights. It was easy for people to kill themselves with their gas lights. When England stopped using gas lighting, suicide by gas lights was eliminated. I wonder why neither the prosecutor nor the defense attorneys have used an expert witness on suicide. This just doesn't seem to have what it takes to be a suicide. It's the wrong time of day, it's the wrong instrument for a woman to use, suicide takes planning and the person who commits suicide hears voices in their head day in and day out until it drives them crazy and that person can no longer reason. Of course, many an actress has gone home with Phil Spector and dated him and been threatened by him. The prosecution didn't put all the women who would like to come forward with their experiences when Phil Spector threatened them. It would take up too much time. I do not believe Lana Clarkson committed suicide. It just doesn't add up. Too many things aren't there. The worst thing of all -- intelligent, drunk Mr. Spector never called 911. I just think that is awful. How arrogant can a rich man be? That arrogant, obviously. Georgie
uhh, how about this one.
drugs are illegal. cocaine and heroine are not produced or manufactured by illicit enterprises in this country.
yet, cocaine and heroine are still shipped into this country in much larger volumes than the comparable amount of illicit arms that flow through this country.
has making drugs illegal changed anything or stopped any of it from permeating the country? no
would making guns illegal keep people who want them from getting them? no
would it stop people from using them to kill others? no
making guns illegal would prevent the occasional everday citizen from having easy access to firearms that might instead make them seek out other forms of deadly weapons.
it would not prevent the countless murders that occur in inner cities where the majority of the weapons are already obtained illegally
also, by making guns illegal you are revoking the very last resort that citizens of this country have to fight against oppressive government.
dont you understand that is the reason why guns are included in the second amendment?
our very last and most precious freedom concerns everday life. our second to the last and second most important freedom concerns our ability to defend ourselves from anyone and anything, including our own government who cannot take that freedom away.
taking away the right to bear arms would make it very easy to run this country as a military state.
Is Punkin Pie a liar - as the prosecution would have us believe -or are people just jumping to conclusions far too quickly?
Michael Bay - was in court to disprove PIE’s prior testimony that named BAY as a catalyst for Lana Clarkson’s suicide after he snubbed her at a party.
Bay admitted he attend the party, but apparently didn't see Lana & so could not snub her, and thus Punkin Pie has given false testimony according to Bay.
Is it possible that Michael Bay was so engrossed at the party that he did not notice Lana, and so Lana may have thought that Bay snubbed her. Or could it be that Bay is lying?
So it is not absolute that Pie is lying on that point!
Punkin Pie testified previously that the Clarkson family lawyers etc had told her just after Lana died to not to say anything to the police about Lana’s suicidal thoughts prior to Lana’s death. If you were in Punkin Pie’s shoes and if the Lana Clarkson family lawyer and others tampered with you in a criminal investigation by telling you to withhold information about Lana Clarkson’s suicidal thoughts heard a few days before she died. What would you do in that situation that is if you were able to shrug off this oppression later?If it is true that Punkin Pie was initially told to cover up Lana’s suicidal thoughts after Lana’s death - and went along with it - then Pie may have also gone along with the story of Spector’s alleged guilt for a year or more.
But if Pie set herself free of her oppression & revealed what her best friend Lana Clarkson said to Pie days before Lana Clarkson died - then it is also possible that at the trial Pie was too embarrased to admit that she had initially made disparaging remarks against Spector in 2003 -in front of him at the trial in July 2007.
So don't give up on Pie until you absolutely have to!
I don’t think director Michael Bay holds the answer. He wasn’t that much of a friend to Lana obviously.
And as a director I am surprised he does not acknowledge that an actress who is depressed about their career failure may not make a point of slapping Bay in the face.
Tony, think about it. This case has everything to do with handgun laws. This case wouldn’t even be in court and a beautiful, young woman would still be alive if private handgun ownership had been outlawed. Your assertion that, “we don't have the right to shoot people and when we do, we have laws and a system that will deal with them accordingly”, is of little consolation to the man whose 5 year old grandson was recently killed after being shot through the head while they fished together. I’m certain your words would be of little solace to the family of the woman Phil Spector killed either. The second amendment to our Constitution protects the pre-existing right to bear arms with the phrase, “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” James Madison and the other founding fathers could be considered visionary, but none of them could have envisioned our modern scenario of expansive, overcrowded, urban environments saturated with weapons where petty disagreements are settled with gunplay. Madison clearly had military use of weapons in defense of our country in mind when he crafted the Second Amendment. At the time it was written Americans were justifiably frightened of the prospect of another attack by the British and wanted the guarantee that they’d be able to defend themselves and their fledgling republic at a moment’s notice. Reasons for contemporary private handgun ownership bear little if any resemblance to the reasons for keeping and bearing arms in 1789. Handgun laws must evolve to keep pace with our changing society.
Yeah bobby joe, because Phil Spector is clearly a 'gun toting thug, who is the product of a teenage mother with too many kids' Give me a break, and please tell me that was an ill-advised attempt at humor.
Somewhere I saw a reference to Punkin Pie being the 'Kato Kaelin' of this trial - that is spot on!! If you are looking for good entertainment, watch the testimony again on the court tv website. The more you watch Ms. Pie's testimony, the more you realize it was all an act. Some friend - a disgusting attempt at 15 minutes of fame. Thrilled the prosecution brought Michael Bay to the stand to rebut her testimony! Question - Ms. Pie states that she was Lana's bff - her very very best bff - spoke to her at least 10 times a day - however, the last time she speaks to Lana is a few days before her death, and that was the call when Lana was so distraught it was 'frightening'. Aside from the fact that if the call was so 'frightening' she didn't even bother to call someone (i.e Lana's family, a doctor, police, suicide hotline etc.) to help her bestest bff, she obviously also did not miss the 10 + daily phone calls from Lana from the last 'frightening' phone call to the day Lana was killed. A 'frightening' phone call, coupled by no communication for at least 1 day should have prompted Ms. Pie to at least go and check on her terribly distraught friend. Hmmmmm - any bets on when her book comes out? Gee, ya think she'll want to play herself in the TV movie? Ms. Pie, you are pathetic.
The laws are not written for law abiding citizens in the first place. I don't need a law before I stop robbing and killing -I wouldn't do it even if no such laws existed. The laws are written for the people who, if it weren't against the law -would be doing it -and as the first step to punish those who go and do those acts anyway, knowing they are against the law.
A global study of gun laws vs. murder rate by firearm (based on data all member countries are supposed to provide to the UN) proves conclusively -they are not related. Stricter gun laws do NOT equal 'safer citizens'. In fact, it would be more accurate to say the stricter the gun laws, the higher the murder rate of citizens by firearm.
Mexico has very rigid gun laws. No one is allowed to own one larger than a .22 caliber, may only own one after receiving permission from the government and they may not carry it in public either openly or concealed. Most people don't own a gun in Mexico. Yet Mexico's murder rate by firearm is 17.5 per 100,000.
In Russia handgun ownership is not allowed at all and citizens must receive government permission to own a long gun -which must be totally dismantled when transporting. Russia's murder rate by firearm is 30.6 per 100,000.
There are more handguns in the US than there are citizens. MILLIONS and MILLIONS of handguns -we are one of them most heavily armed people in the world per capita. But our murder rate by firearm is 7 per 100,000. Believe it or not, there are countries with even MORE liberal gun laws than the US. Israel has more liberal gun laws than the US -their murder rate by firearm is 1.4 per 100,000. Finland has more liberal gun laws -their murder rate by firearm is 2.7 per 100,000.
Brazil has strict gun laws. All firearms must be registered with the government which is a lengthy and time consuming process. Citizens may not own more than two guns at a time and may not buy more than one a year and they may not be larger than a 9 mm. To transport one's personal guns requires a special permit from the government -also time consuming. Brazil's murder rate by firearm is 19 per 100,000. Plus they have a booming black market in handguns -where in spite of their rigid gun laws, it is possible to buy just about any kind of handgun on the black market.
So the notion that stricter gun laws somehow make people SAFER from those who would misuse a gun is a canard and a dangerous one at that.
James Madison warned future generations that there would come a time when certain people would insist everyone in the nation had to forfeit the 2nd Amendment in the name of safety -and that it would be a lie. As far as the founders were concerned, the 2nd Amendment is the one that protects the rest of our freedoms and prevents our OWN government from turning on its own people. And historically, when a government does turn on its own people, it invariably disarms the population first.
page: 1
pookyAug 7th, 2007 - 15:03:45
Damaging testimony by Punkin Pie? How can anyone with the name 'Punkin Pie' truly be taken seriously??
Report this comment