Last week, we profiled music producer Phil Spector’s defense attorney Doron Weinberg. Now it’s lead prosecutor Alan Jackson’s turn.According to the State Bar of California website, Alan Jay Jackson, State Bar 173647, was admitted to practice on December 12, 1994---14 years ago.
Jackson received his undergraduate degree from the University of Texas, and his law degree from Pepperdine University School of Law in Malibu, California.
After attending high school, He spent four years as an enlisted airman, attaining the rank of E4.
After a short stint in a Southern California civil litigation firm, Jackson was offered his dream job of prosecutor with the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office—in 1995 at the time of the OJ Simpson murder trial.
Although Jackson started in a misdemeanor department, later in the 1990’s Jackson was assigned to the Hardcore Gang Division of the LADA's office, prosecuting gang members. His cases were almost exclusively murder cases during this time.
As a member of the Major Crimes Division of the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office where Alan Jackson is currently assigned, Jackson is responsible for handling high-profile and complex cases.
Before taking on the Phillip Spector murder case, Jackson won a conviction in a 19 year old case involving the murder for hire of a famous race car driver and his wife by a former business partner.
In addition, Alan Jackson is now in the middle of a retrial of the Phil Spector case, a case that he handled as lead prosecutor for five months before the jury deadlocked, necessitating a retrial. As such, Alan Jackson has been living and breathing the Phil Spector case for three years.
LA Times reporter Peter Hong who covered the Spector trial said this about Jackson:
"He was portrayed as a young up-and-comer in the prosecutorial community, but I tried not to characterize him as such because, in reality, he is an experienced, seasoned prosecutor."
That experience and seasoning shows in the courtroom—as does Jackson’s charismatic personality and self confidence as a trial lawyer.
60 comments:
Thank you for the short profile of Alan Jackson. I can not help but remark on the picture that you picked to post along with the words here. This brilliant, caring and dedicated man has had many photos taken of him and this is by far one of the most graphic. You could have taken the high road. Knowing your remarks from the other blogs you have posted, I can only imagine the narcissistic comment you talked of in an earlier blog was your intent by using this photo.
District Attorney Alan Jackson may well be easy on the eyes, but it is how he presents his ideas and his words that grab a person's attention.
Actions still speak louder than words. In the courtroom we have seen what can and has been presented by the other side and even a child will tell you that is bad behavior by all involved in the defense of Phil Spector.
Now I will take the low road, and remind you that even though Alan Jackson does just about everything remarkably well, he could not have spent four years as an enlisted airman attaining the rank of E4 before attending high school as you have stated in your third paragraph. One word makes a difference, one picture does too. It could show you were in a hurry to post this article, or it could show you just did not care enough to do the right thing.
Thank you for your good intentions in trying to find the truth and justice in this case, I believe I already have. Phil Spector is guilty.
Well seasoned is an understatement.
I watched PS1 last year and Alan Jackson (imo) had Phil Spector locked up for life. Unfortunatly, we had a juror who was more interested in his 12 minutes of media fame and another who decided to just follow his lead at the last minute.
Alan Jackson is up again (round two) Phil Spector is GUILTY.
It was clear in the first trial and more than clear today.
I have watched many trials since courtTV first aired. Alan Jackson is one of the best prosecutors I have ever seen!He is very bright, but I doubt he spent 4 years in the service of our country BEFORE he went to high school!
He has shown me beyond a reasonable doubt, that Phil Spector shot and killed Lana Clarkson and IMO he will be convicted this time around!
I know you like Mr Whineberg, but come on! There is just no comparing the two!
Dear Alan Jackson fans:
We have corrected the typo; thank you.
BTW, the posted photo was the most flattering to Mr. Jackson Spector trial photo that we could find.
The two lawyer profiles that we have posted on the opposing Spector counsel are not the time and the place to express whatever personal feelings that we may harbor toward either of the two. Every effort was made to present each in the best light possible.
We intentionally omitted to include several quotes from Mr. Jackson published in various articles self appraising his talents as superlative, and also omitted to report that Jackson likes to say that he was at a Utah ski resort (in a hot tub) when he received news he was hired by Los Angeles District Attorney Gil Garcetti and that Mr. Garcetti (with whom Jackson says he was on a first name basis), called him personally to give him the news.
We agree that the two lawyers cannot be compared to each other—although they are both highly effective trial lawyers.
Dorn Weinberg has been trying complex felony criminal cases for over 39 years and is a dyed-in-the wool criminal defense attorney, believing strongly in our individual liberties.
Alan Jackson is the flashier neophyte, practicing for 14 years, who cannot imagine doing anything else but prosecute the criminally accused.
Jackson is clearly going places; Weinberg has already been there and is at the peak of his career.
In any event, the above profile of Mr. Jackson cannot be fairly read as unflattering or unadmiring. He is a fine trial lawyer, no doubt about it.
I would be interested in knowing what "high profile" cases DW has tried in 40 years. Just the 80's to date would be acceptable.
I am really interested.
Dear Anon@March 2, 2009 9:07 AM
We are happy to oblige.
One of the most interesting high profile cases recently handled by Doron Weinberg was the federal prosecution of a former head of state in the Northern District of California on money laundering and fraud charges—other than Manuel Noriega—the only prosecution of a foreign head of state on US soil in the history of the United States. (Weinberg won a dismissal of over half of the counts charged before the case went to the jury, and the jury acquitted the former prime minister of several more counts.)
Weinberg also handled the appeal and in December, 2008 won a reversal for his client in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. The former prime minister was accused of looting more than $115 Million from his own country (some estimate as much as $800 Million) before relocating to Marin County, California by buying Edie Murphy’s former estate in Novato.
In 2005 Weinberg represented a former San Francisco prosecutor accused of bilking a former NBA player out of more than $2 million.
On November 11, 2006, Weinberg won an acquittal for a criminal defendant, found not guilty of a 1998 murder in a high-profile case made controversial by the prosecutor's reliance on a jailhouse informant who was discredited—resulting in the retrial that Weinberg won for his client.
In the first prosecution of its kind in the United States, in 1990 Doron Weinberg won an acquittal of a sitting Federal District Judge who was found not guilty of obstructing justice. It was the first prosecution of a Federal judge under the Federal racketeering statute.
These are but a few complex criminal cases handled by Mr. Weinberg in his 39 year career, since 1990.
Thank you for the profile of Alan Jackson. He is one of the most talented Attorneys I've had the pleasure of watching.
I find it interesting that you claim to have no interest in posting your personal feelings and present yourself as above such things, and then make a list of the negative things you were above posting for all to see. None of which, as you said, have anything to do with his abilities as a Lawyer and all of which are petty.
If you don't like the man why not just say so?
Your admiration of Doron Weinberg is obvious and certainly the adversarial system of Justice would not work without Attorneys willing to defend the people who molest children, share child pornography and murder others, as three of his recent clients did.
Mr. Weinberg is not shy about tooting his own horn, so why shouldn't Mr. Jackson? It's a profession that requires confidence in oneself.
Dear Anonymous to Blogonaut at March 2, 2009 12:13 PM:
You wrote: “I find it interesting that you claim to have no interest in posting your personal feelings and present yourself as above such things, and then make a list of the negative things you were above posting for all to see. None of which, as you said, have anything to do with his abilities as a Lawyer and all of which are petty.”
We never claimed “to have no interest in posting [our] personal feelings and present[ed] [ourselves] as above such things.”
We stated that we omitted any injection of our personal feelings toward either Weinberg or JACKSON IN THE POSTED PROFILES.
You are referring to my comments rebuttal in response to several commenters accusing us of anti-Jackson bias, in which we mentioned several things about Mr. Jackson that we omitted from the profile.
We don’t know how many times we have to say this: Alan Jackson is a very talented trial lawyer. We do not dislike Mr. Jackson, whom we have never met.
There are some attributes that Alan Jackson displays that rub us (and others) the wrong way. In addition, we do not think that any trial lawyer—after 8 or 9 years trying serious felony cases has paid his dues yet, compared to a 39 year trial veteran who has spent most of his career quietly trying complex cases in federal court.
Yes, most trial lawyers have larger than average sized egos. (Being one of them, we would know.)
However, Jackson’s claim that a young lawyer a year out of law school is going to be addressing the District Attorney for the County of Los Angeles as “Gil” when he calls to offer him a job (instead of Mr. Garcetti), or pointing out that Jackson happened to be at one of the most expensive ski resorts in the country (in a hot tub no less) when he got the call from “Gil” is, well, Hollywood braggadocio in the extreme.
Moreover, I don’t know many accomplished trial lawyers would volunteer that they had a “great talent” for oratory—except maybe Melvin Beli when he was alive.
Nor did I refer to a mainstream media article on Mr. Jackson that mentioned that while many view Mr. Jackson as handsome, charismatic and talented, others view is trial style as more akin to a game show host. (See, “Full Court Coverage,” ABA Journal, January 2008 issue [“Some say Los Angeles prosecutor Alan Jackson has movie-star looks. Others compare him to a game-show host.”]
Look, maybe (an obviously wealthy) Alan Jackson, first year lawyer, had just had an incredible day skiing in Park City Utah, and was unwinding in a hot tub, when he received a telephone call from “Gill” (the District Attorney for Los Angeles County) offering him a job, and he in fact was on a first name basis with Gill Garcetti.
Portraying the scenario as such is not consistent with a person in that position.
Referring to himself as a talented orator is not consistent with how a talented, recognized, trial lawyer would characterize himself. Sorry, but the man is narcissistic self promoting name dropper.
Last, please name a single incident where Doron Weinberg “tooted his won horn” is this or any manner.
You cannot, because this kind of distasteful self promotion only is characteristic of Hollywood attorneys of which we (as a 5th generation Californian) are decidedly not.
Wow, you are really jealous of this man aren't you? God given gifts and hard work seem to have worked for this fine attorney. Your indignation seems to come from a place of anger.
First name is common in the South
he may have been told to call him by his first name, friends often pay for ski trips and you have no problem telling us of the things you are proud of in your own circumstances...5th generation Californian.
I have no idea what you are asking with the “tooted his won horn” about DW, I tend not to think about those things.
Most of Mr. Jackson's fans have read these articles before and just go to the real meat and potatoes of what is important.
Hollywood lawyers are your own private issue from what you are telling us and not the man in question. Please look again at how this all sounds and make another attempt at having a good reason for your bias.
Dear March 2, 2009 1:59 PM:
We are not following you.
Sorry.
I am Allan Yackson, and “I’m too sexy”. You are all yellous of me.
I am in hot tub at famous ski resort-Park City Youta.
DA Garcetti say to me in hot tub, Allan, you are sexy. Come work for Me, yo sexy smart Yackson.
I say, “Gill,” OK Dude, I need dry off from hot tub, then we can be TWO SEXY GUYS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I am at your favorite sexy resort, Gill!!!!!!!!!!!
Gil say OK buddy, you got job you sexy guy!!!!!!!!!!!!
--Plausible Story
I don't mind saying I AM a fan of Alan Jackson. I say Doran Weinberg has met his match. You say that Weinberg has practiced more than 39years and is at his peak!
I say, Mr.Jackson is just taking less time to reach his! I believe he will stay on top for a long time! He is so passionate about JUSTICE, not winning for a client who pays the big bucks!
May the best man win.
(I mean, the facts and the laws have something to do with it, as does the make-up of the jury--but as long as the discussion digresses into personalities and regions, and as a NORTINO go Weinberg!)
Alan Jackson is as to Dorn Weinberg as Barry Manilow is to Bruce Springsteen.
As John Tesh as to Yani.
As form is to substance.
PS: The coincidence of whether the self serving Jackson happens (in a given instance) to be on the right, or the wrong, side of a case has nothing to do with his basic superficiality.
Allan Jackson is to Doron Weinberg as Alabama is to California.
As NASCAR is to Pavarotti.
As Iron Horse is to vintage Krug.
California Sushi Roll on Wilshire is to Urasawa.
As Arby’s is to Spago.
As Paris Hilton is to Catherine Deneuve.
I never before noticed how small and delicate Alan Jackson's hands are....
Thank you for the profile of Alan Jackson. He is one of the most talented Attorneys I've pleasured myself while watching.
Dear Blogonaut,
Thank you for your response to my comment. I notice that you refer to yourself as both "We" and "I", so when I say "you" please know I mean how ever many of you there are.
I see no difference between posting negative things in the comments or the actual body of the blog. Surely you are aware that blog readers write the comments and will refer back to read other comments.
I apologize for upsetting you. It is obvious from your response that you have some deep personal feeling for Mr. Weinberg. My interest is in the Spector case and not the details of Mr.Jackson's upbringing, his family's income or the past "quotes" of his.
I don't think Jackson is perfect by any means, but I do think he takes his job seriously and does it to the best of his abilities. A job he is very skilled at, as far as I have seen.
Mr. Weinberg is not perfect either. After 39 years of practice you'd think he would know the rules of the court well enough not to be in violation of Discovery, unless he's doing something he knows is wrong on purpose. There's a reason rules are made. He has been sanctioned in other courts as well, so it isn't a one time mistake.
To you that may not equal having a rich family or calling a DA by their first name, but to some of us the behavior of an attorney in their job is more important than the advantages they might have had growing up.
I am so happy to finally find a bio on Alan Jackson. I am in AWE of his good looks, his connections, his HAIR!!!!
Is he SINGLE?
It's amazing when it takes someone 40 years to reach their "peak."His peak?" Sounds like both Weinberg and Spector are an interesting team. They get each other.
Alan Jackson is young, brilliant, articulate, consistant and extremely professional.
Make no mistake, from what I have witnessed in both these trials Alan Jackson will continue to move steadily towards all his professional goals, NOW!
Alan Jackson's approach is with the precision and rigor of a watchmaker.
"Who is Phil Spector defense Doron Weinberg?
NOW!
Hummm.
Interesting to stake one's career on the outcome of a single case--expecially after beiing so egotistical and showy about it.
(Not that Jackson has any political enemies in the DA's Office who might be rooting for him to fail or anything.)
Well seasoned is an understatement.
"Tasty" would be more accurate!
A pretty popular saying comes to mind...
It's not the quantity but the quality.
Alan Jackson's work ethics is nothing but quality without compromise.
Alan Jackson is to Doron Weinberg as Walter Keane is to Renoirs.
Alan Jackson is to Doron Weinberg as Diamond Bar is to Pacific Palisades.
A pretty popular saying comes to mind...
5:02, you are an illiterate moron.
pretty bird pretty bird
If Alan Jackson loses this case what happens to his career momentum?
Anyone?
Hint: Anyone heard of Gil Garcetti lately (post OJ)?
Dear 4:39: "Steadily... NOW!" would appear to be oxymoronic.
Or perhaps merely moronic.
PS: Where did you say you were in YOUR career path exactly?
Dear 5:37:
No "merely" about it.
It's a warm fuzzy feeling when you finally get to someone.
"Moron" that's all you have left to pull out of your hat?
This is off topic, but Sprocket's blog T&T will not publish it.
On T&T today, "Carol" asked a question about "that appellate attorney" in Spector I, and whether that was Doron Weinberg.
I explained in a responsive comment that she was thinking of Dennis Reardon, which comment was censored by T&T because I also spoke favorably of Reardon.
My second comment to T&T (also censored) follows:
"I posted earlier today on the appellate lawyer from Spector I, his name, the nature of his role, and his connection to Dorn Weinberg, and my explanatory comment was not enabled in favor of a fuzzy post by a blog administrator who is not even sure of Dennis Reardon’s name.
"Because I spoke favorably of Reardon.
"Can’t have that! He is on the “bad” side!!! Better to not educate ourselves on who Reardon is, and his professional connections with Weinberg (past cases, addresses) than to have anyone be able to speak highly of a highly regarded attorney associated with the defense.
"Even though not a single judge or lawyer in CA, federal or state, will disagree with the proposition that Reardon is one of the finest appellate attorneys in California.
"I have tried and tried to give you people the benefit of the doubt, but, to quote Forrest Gump, “stupid is as stupid does”.
"By all means keep your heads in the sand, and then be “shocked” when Spector is acquitted or his conviction is reversed for improper admission of uncharged prior “bad acts” evidence under Section 1101.
"You people are the Taliban of trial reporting."
*END CENSORED COMMENT*
PS TO BLOGONAUT: Thanks for providing an uncensored forum open to all points of view.
I agree with "gameshow host".
Dear Anon@7:58PM:
You are always welcome to post here, whatever your point of view.
We do NOT engage in censorship, which is one of the many indicia that we are the open minded blog.
My entry for the Alan Jackson photo caption contest:
“But you have to admit that I have great hair, see?"
Re: Alan Jackson photo caption contest:
“THIS is the miracle of Botox™.”
Alan Jackson photo caption contest entry:
“Eat your heart out Truc Do.”
My Alan Jackson photo caption contest entry:
“Who says the criminal law ain’t pretty?”
This gets funnier by the minute. RE: 2:55PM Plausible Story, thanks for breaking up the monotony of all the negative responses. That was very entertaining.
Blogonaut, your Alan Jackson profile IMO was unbiased and factual. You even included a quote that was a generous compliment to him. It's apparent that several of the Jackson supporters are confused. Judging by their use of grammar and inability to spell, I suspect their comprehension skills are weak as well.
Keep up the good work!
Alan Jackson photo caption contest:
When Gil gives me my next Gold Star, I'm going to put it right here.
Blogger Sprocket is reporting that the reason that court was dark on Monday March 2 may be that in view of Spector's "crumbling defense" (exact quote) Spector may be "pulling a stall" to get an extra day of freedom.
My comment to T&T that will never be published: What crumbling defense?
The defense case is in far better shape at this point than during Spector I.
This was blowing smoke, if you will.
Thanks for letting it happen.
Another day another intense trial.
No hard feelings this morning.
However, I believe he is GUILTY.
My view: Lana Clarkson was falling down drunk depressed and talking of ending it all in emails and to her friends as recently as days before her death.
Her closest friends are “bad people” you say? Nevertheless, they are the people that knew Lana Clarkson best, and they are the ones who saw her falling down drunk, depressed and suicidal during her last days.
The prosecution cannot put the gun in Phillip Spector's hand when it was fired.
The driver is unreliable.
Therefore, I would be required to acquit.
NO amount of speculation by Sprocket or Alan Jackson will or can supply that missing proof.
It will all be up to the jury soon.
PS to March 3, 2009 5:35 AM:
"Believing" is not the same thing as proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Some of us, and the law, require the latter. This is not some American Idol contest or Super Bowl where we all passionately advocate for our favorite outcome. Constitutional standards apply and those principles are more important than Phillip Spector or Lana Clarkson.
Photo caption contest:
“Don’t do it Allan! There will be other cases.”
Dear March 3, 2009 1:40 AM:
The defense case is not “crumbling”—it is in fact in far better shape than at this point in the trial in Spector I.
Just remember one thing: Even in Spector I, with lead counsel Cutler falling on his face then leaving the trial, with Baden’s “ah ha” moment, with an expert witnesses self destructing on the stand, Dr. Lee dropping out of the trial, and with the defense in disarray—the first ballot of the jury in Spector I was 5 votes for not guilty, 3 undecided, and 4 votes for guilty.
With different jury dynamics (and we do have a different jury for Spector II) the final vote could have easily gone the other way.
This case could easily result in a not guilty verdict.
Alan Jackson photo contest:
“Don’t do it Alan! There is always a job waiting for you at the House of Blues!”
Believe~
I have confidence in the TRUTH, the RELIABILITY of what Alan Jackson has presented in this case to date!
Why is it necessary to continue with smart azz remarks on this blog this morning. (again)
Dear March 3, 2009 7:55 AM:
You are confusing what Alan Jackson "has said" (not evidence) with the evidence he has presented to the jury (no direct evidence that Spector fired the shot, no physical evidence excluding the possibility that Clarkson shot herself).
You are also ignoring the evidence that Lana Clarkson was falling down drunk sloppy depressed and crying days before she died and talked of ending it all in a December 8 email and verbally to of her other friends.
Clarkson was sloppy drunk and on Vicodin the morning she died (1.2 blood alcohol—almost twice the legal limit to drive + the synergistic effects of the combined Vicodin).
Clarkson had GSR on her hands.
The driver has given eight versions of what he heard that night, and the next morning told police he was not sure.
Can the evidence also be interpreted as pointing to guilt?
Yes. However (stay with me) the jury will be instructed that if there are two reasonable interpretations of the circumstantial evidence—one pointing to guilt, the other to innocence—the jury MUST adopt the be interpretation pointing toward innocence.
So there you have it. Even disregarding every single expert called by the defense, there is reasonable doubt under the law.
BELIEF and RELIABILITY concerning WHAT ALAN JACKSON HAS SAID has nothing to do with the applicable legal standards that the jury took an oath to follow, or with what the trial evidence shows and does not show or exclude.
You may rejoin the rest of the Taliban over at Sprocket’s Trials & Tribulations blog now, where they are speculating that Spector and/or Weinberg faked a medical excuse yesterday to delay the trial, perhaps due to the “crumbling” defense and the (two?) remaining witnesses backing out of the trial.
Now that is what I call funny.
Alan Jackson photo caption contest entry:
“I need another hung jury like a hole in the head.”
The caption contest has moved to it's own post.
Enjoy!
Dear 8:33 a.m.
I am actually solo bud...
I don't fly with the Trial and Tribs blog. She's a .....
Thank you very much...
In addition, Alan Jackson does not spin my cookie personally. I have been following this case from day one. I have my opinion and you certainly have yours. I won't convince you and vise verse.
I have a deep interest in this case for my own reason.
I do my own homework...
Dear March 3, 2009 9:54 AM:
All opinions and views are welcome here--without exception.
This blog is open minded.
If T&T (or any other publication) has refused to publish your comment, you are welcome to post it here.
There is a new winner, see:
http://blogonaut-blogonaut.blogspot.com/2009/03/spector-trial-alan-jackson-caption.html
My censored comment that I tried to post on Sprocket’s T&T (who is claiming that the trial delay was built on lies because Weinberg is afraid it is all going down the tubes):
No way is anyone playing games here, nor does defense counsel think Spector is so disadvantaged that it would even occur to him to delay the trial by two days for bogus reasons.
Nor (trust me on this) does the defense believe that they are losing this case—let alone your theory that the defense has taken a powder because they are going down.
If the reason for the delay was that Pie could not be located, then Weinberg would have told Fidler that and asked for more time--not lie about the reason. AND, Spector’s other remaining witnesses would be called in the interim.
It is possible that the defense put Fidler and the prosecution on notice that Spector may be testifying, and allowed the prosecution 2 days to prepare cross before he took the stand.
If this is true, then Spector probably insisted on this—over Weinberg’s advice.
IF Fidler was told that Spector was undergoing a "medical procedure" then he was.
Period end of story.
Reputible attorneys do now lie to judges, let alone about things easily verified.
If I was the betting type, my money would be on Mr. Spector really having undergone a medical procedure. Besides, why would he jeopardize his situation?
Alan Jackson is a hunk!
Is he married?
Spector is guilty. I was in the courtroom, and the jury never looks at him.
Doron Weinberg represented child porn collector Bernie Ward and is about to try the case of pedophile Dr. William Ayres, though I suspect that this case will end in a plea deal.
And it's "Doron" not Dorn, Blogonaut.
Dear March 27, 2009 11:08 AM:
You do not state when you were in the courtroom or for how long.
However, we will tell you that in the 30+ years we have been trying criminal cases to verdict (we stopped counting in the 1980’s’ at 100), jurors have it drummed into them that they are not to communicate with parties and their counsel (and if they look the other way take no offense), tend to be close to the vest, and it is very common to have jurors not make eye-contact with a defendant and yet acquit.
In a recent SF Bay Area jury trial all twelve jurors refused to look at our client after reaching a verdict (as they filed into court). It was doubly concerning, because the jury had only been out for half an hour—a time frame we regarded too short for an acquittal. The jury found our client not guilty.
Conversely, several decades ago we tried an ugly assault case and every day during trial one male juror looked at us and smiled the friendliest smile you have ever seen.
He led the charge to convict.
Thank you for catching us in a typo. You get a gold star, Samuel.
Post a Comment