Today, apparently, the jury began deliberating whether Phil Spector is guilty of second degree murder, involuntary manslaughter, or is innocent. I watched Beth Karas’s brief summary of what both the prosecution and the defense had to say in closing arguments.

In my opinion, the jury will dismiss the idea this time that Lana Clarkson committed suicide. They may discuss whether she might have been driven to it by Spector’s taunting her. She had good reason to be depressed. She was probably humiliated that night by what happened at the club where she was a hostess.

But even those jurors who think that Ms. Clarkson may have “voluntarily” pulled the trigger, I believe, will spend most of their time pondering the jury instructions in which both “second degree murder” and “involuntary manslaughter” are defined for them according to California law.

I don’t think this will be an easy decision. I’ve been through something like this in jury deliberations.

This is a hellish position for jurors to be placed in. Unless there’s a lawyer on the jury, they will have to use their common sense and understanding of the English language.

In my opinion, jury instructions are a great abomination. I’m not particularly a proponent of “the plain English” movement in the law. But neither do I think the courts should force jurors to think and speak like lawyers.