Anyone who follows homicide investigations or watches murder trials surely knows the famous (or infamous to some) Henry C. Lee. As soon as a celebrity is accused of murder, both defense and prosecutors hope to nab him first for their side. O.J. Simpson murder trial - William Kennedy Smith rape trial, Kobe Bryant case and other high-profile cases have depended on the expertise of Lee.
Now he is involved in the Phil Spector trial. This is murder case against him in the death of Lana Clarkson, a 40-year-old actress, who was found shot to death Feb. 3, 2003, in the music producer's home. Attorney Robert Shapiro hired Lee immediately so he could begin the scientific hunt for evidence to prove Spector innocent - or at least produce doubt of his guilt in jurors' minds.
Now Lee's career is in jeopardy. Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Larry Paul Fidler has questioned Lee's credibility. There have always been ethical questions around hiring specialists - some believe that many might focus on anything that supports their side rather than being truly neutral and "scientific" about the evidence. So "reasonable doubt" about a specialist's "truth" is nothing new.
This is something new, however. Fidler ruled last month that prosecutors could present testimony that Lee took evidence from the crime scene and kept it from prosecutors. It remains to be seen if this can be "proven" - but the light it casts on Lee could cloud how many view his testimony in the future.