NEW YORK–Like a Shakespearean tragedy, the Blagojevich debacle just keeps getting better and better. Narcissism.  Corruption. Colorful characters. And farce.  

Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich was convicted at his impeachment trial shortly after delivering closing argument

But it's not funny. Not really. Because whatever really went down in this case, something is rotten in the state of Denmark. And Denmark isn't the Prairie State. Rather, it’s a political state of mind in which entitlement and corruption have become the order of the day.

Blagojevich follows a long line of governors gone wild. Blagojevich's predecessor, George Ryan, is in prison. We lost Eliot Spitzer to his own devices here in New York and Jim McGreevey in New Jersey before that. But their wrongdoings pale in comparison to Bernie Madoff and the larger scandals of Wall Street.  

Add to that a Bush administration that has thus far escaped accountability for the lies it told: Scooter Libby, Dick Cheney, Alberto Gonzalez. The Bush notion of accountability?  “It is what it is.”  Our last president passed the buck for his failures - including all that bad intelligence about WMD. 

Now a new president is talking about a new accountability. But we won't get it if we just pat ourselves on the back about Blagojevich and call it a day. 

–Jami Floyd, In Session anchor 

LAWRENCE, Massachusetts–On day nine of the arson murder trial of Kathleen Hilton, prosecutors presented testimony to support their position that investigators looked for other causes before they suspected arson in a fire that killed a family of five.

Kathleen Hilton with defense attorney

Hilton, 62, is charged with five counts of second-degree murder in connection with the fire. She has pleaded not guilty to all charges. The defense is expected to begin presenting their case next week.

Dennis Toto, an electrician and consultant to the State Fire Marshall’s Office, testified he was called to the scene to determine whether faulty wiring could have caused the High Rock Street fire. He noted there was no damage to the wiring connecting the smoke alarm on the second floor landing, and in fact noted that the circuit breaker connected to that wiring had “tripped,” indicating to him that the safety mechanism had been activated and the electrical systems were working properly.

Toto testified that he examined the electrical devices on the first floor, found them in good condition and concluded that “electrical current was not the heat source that caused the fire.”

The jury also heard from two fire investigators at the scene who took statements from witnesses. David Legere testified he took a statement from Krystina Sutherland, who told him her ex-boyfriend had called at 9:00 p.m. that night and threatened to burn her house down if she didn’t let him see their children.

Another fire investigator said he went to the house the day after the fire to document the scene, drawing diagrams and sketches of the burned rooms. His testimony centered on his observations of the staircase leading to the upper floors. He noted that there was a direct shaft from the staircase to the third floor, and that there were rubber mats on each step and on the bottom of the landing. While the rubber mats on the lower steps were destroyed by fire they left a distinguishable pattern.

Also called by the Commonwealth was John Drugan, the chemist who conducted tests on evidence samples, including clothing taken from Kareme Powell for the presence of accelerant. At the time of the fire, Powell was visiting his grandmother who lived on the first floor of the house. He did not reveal the results to the jury, but the Commonwealth is expected to argue that investigators tested his clothing to rule him out as a suspect.

Drugan also testified that certain alcohol-based accelerants are difficult to detect. He returns to the witness stand on Friday.

Stay tuned to In Session for live coverage with correspondent Beth Karas.

–In Session staff

LAWRENCE, Massachusetts–Sean Fitzpatrick’s retrial has begun in the same Massachusetts courthouse where he was tried last August for two counts of first-degree murder. Fitzpatrick is accused of killing his former lover’s husband and a co-worker in March 2006.

Sean Fitzpatrick

The first trial ended in a deadlock after the jury couldn’t decide if Fitzpatrick shot Michael Zammitti Jr. in the head as he sat at his desk and his employee, Chester Roberts, who apparently had just arrived at the concrete business Zammitti owned.

Opening statements were followed by the testimony of Michael Zammitti Sr., who relived that tragic morning. He described how he found his son slumped at his desk and Roberts lying on the floor at the entrance, shot in the back. Zammitti Sr. ran out of the building screaming and called 911.

Michele Zammitti, wife of the victim, testified on Monday. She repeated the story of her brief affair with Fitzpatrick during a rocky time in her marriage, but said she was committed to saving the marriage and ended the affair with Fitzpatrick in August 2005. Fitzpatrick continued to try to see her, especially when she and her family were at their second home in Freedom, New Hampshire where Fitzpatrick lived year round.

Just as they did in the first trial, this week jurors visited the site of the shooting in Wakefield, MA.

The Commonwealth’s evidence is the same with the exception of an additional witness, a Ford Motor Co. engineer, who is expected to say that the grainy security camera that captured a green truck arriving and leaving Allstate Concrete on March 13, 2006 is consistent with a Ford model 150 pickup truck. That’s the same make and color of the truck the Commonwealth says Fitzpatrick used to commit the double murder.

A transponder on the windshield of a green Ford 150 pickup truck belonging to Fitzpatrick’s New Hampshire neighbor also shows that tolls were paid going from New Hampshire to Massachusetts and back the day of the murders, March 13, 2006.  The owner of that truck was in Florida for the winter and did not authorize anyone to use it.

The defense says Fitzpatrick didn’t do it. His attorney is expected to argue that there were others with a motive to kill the president of Allstate Concrete and that the police didn’t do enough to investigate other potential killers. Fitzpatrick testified in the first trial but his attorney will not say whether he’ll take the stand this time around.

The trial is in the same Woburn, MA courthouse though in a different courtroom, and the players are the same. Judge Kathe Tuttman is presiding, Daniel Bennett is leading the prosecution team and attorney Randy Gioia is defending Fitzpatrick. The trial should last another two weeks.

–Beth Karas, In Session correspondent

NEW YORK - For three days running everyone’s been talking about Blagojevich. Not just because he's been talking to any media outlet that will have him, but also because he's been impeached; and he's about to be convicted of abuse of power in the Illinois State Senate.

Gov. Rod Blagojevich

And as the governor admitted right here on Best Defense yesterday, impeachment trials are rare - very rare. There is very little precedent for the impeachment of a sitting governor in Illinois or anywhere else. So it's a big news story. But it’s also a bit of a sideshow - a distraction from what really matters. Like jobs, health care and how we are going to end the two wars we are fighting overseas.

While we're all talking to and about Blagojevich, there is a sea change happening in Washington. In just one week, President Barack Obama has sent an envoy to the Middle East, ordered the closure of the detention center Guantanamo Bay, and visited Capitol Hill in a directed effort to get our economy back on track. These are the issues that matter most to Americans.

So while the Blagojevich story plays out lets all keep it in perspective. It's good theater. It is a reminder of the fallibility of our politicians. And it’s terribly ironic for the state that also gave us the transformational leader who is now our president. But let’s not confuse that irony with the real issues.

-Jami Floyd, In Session anchor

LAWRENCE, Massachusetts–Due to stormy weather here jurors have the day off today. Yesterday, the panel "toured" the burned-out shell of 44-46 High Rock Street through a video taken shortly after the last glowing embers of a blaze that killed a family of five were finally extinguished.

Kathleen Hilton is on trial here for the murder of that family. Prosecutors contend she started the fire during an on-going custody dispute between her son and his ex-girlfriend. Hilton has pleaded not guilty to all charges.

The video shot by fire investigators took jurors through all three apartments including into the room where the five victims could be seen lying crumpled in a heap.

The video shocked relatives of the victims and prompted one to cry out during its viewing. She lashed out in Spanish against defendant Kathleen Hilton and was immediately ushered out by court officers. Jurors sitting in the darkened courtroom were distracted briefly but then returned their attention to the tape, watching the rest of it in silence.

Jurors heard from Paul Horgan, the fire investigator who worked with Lucy, the accelerant-sniffing police dog. He testified that Lucy could detect 17 varieties of petroleum-based liquids, and her rigorous training made her one of only 48 such canines with this particular expertise in the country.

Horgan said Lucy did not alert him to any accelerants on the second-floor landing, where the Commonwealth’s arson expert testified the fire started. She did, however, alert investigators to some fiberglass insulation found on the porch. Horgan explained Lucy was not specifically trained to detect fiberglass insulation, but the dog may have picked up on its similar characteristics.

Earlier in the day Sgt. Kevin Condon, the Commonwealth’s arson expert, suggested Lucy’s failure to detect an accelerant at 44-46 High Rock Street was not unusual, and certainly no grounds to change his theory as accelerants can be consumed by fire, and in this case gallons of water could have washed away any trace of accelerant in the landing.

That did not stop Defense Attorney Michael Natola from emphasizing what appeared to be Lucy’s high success rate at finding evidence of incendiary liquids. Natola noted that in 95 percent of the cases in which the dog detected the presence of an accelerant, subsequent chemical testing proved she was right.

Stay tuned to In Session for correspondent Beth Karas's in depth trial coverage.

–In Session staff

NEW YORK - As a criminal defense attorney, I am all about the presumption of innocence. That's what my show, Best Defense, is all about. But what Gov. Rod Blagojevich, who appeared on today’s show, doesn't seem to fully appreciate - or doesn't want to admit - is that the impeachment proceeding in the Senate of his home state of Illinois is not a criminal trial.

Gov. Rod Blagojevich talks with In Session's Jami Floyd

Sure they call it a “trial.” But it is not a trial, not in the truest sense of the word, the sense that matters: The constitutional sense. The various principals the governor has been touting during his two day media tour, including today, in response to my questions - such as the right to a fair and speedy trial and the right to confront the witnesses against you - are Sixth Amendment requirements and they attach only in criminal cases. Watch Jami Floyd's interview with Gov. Rod Blagojevich.

So, when the governor is tried, which I predict he will be, in federal court, he certainly will be entitled to all the protections afforded by the Sixth Amendment; and he will be entitled to the presumption of innocence until proven guilty of criminal wrongdoing. But this current proceeding, this so called impeachment trial, well this is purely political. And, if he is anything, Rod Blagojevich is a political animal. If he knows nothing else, he should know that.

-Jami Floyd, In Session anchor

NEW YORK–Blago continues to misstate the law. He’s a lawyer. He should know better.

Illinois Senate Impeachment trial of Gov. Rod Blagojevich

Blago has steadfastly refused to answer specific questions from Larry King, CBS’s Maggie Rodriguez and others, including Jami Floyd today on In Session (is that you on the tapes? Did you say that? If it’s out of context, what was the context?) on the grounds that he is legally barred from commenting on a pending legal matter. No. Incorrect.

Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct 3.6 bar attorneys in pending litigations from making certain extrajudicial comments. They do not bar defendants from speaking out in their own cases. Defendants, parties, and witnesses are always free to speak, under the First Amendment, unless there is a gag order in effect. There is no gag order in this case. I have also read the Senate impeachment rules in their entirety, and nothing therein bars Blago from speaking publicly about the allegations against him.

Blago also maintains that “we” felt it was more advisable to do a media tour rather than assert his legal rights in the Senate hearing. As Mark Twain said, "Only kings, presidents, editors, and people with tapeworms have the right to use the editorial 'we'." Blago is trying to sweep his lawyers into his defensive view that appearing at the hearing would be futile.

Yet his attorney, Ed Gensen, would surely like nothing more than a high profile fight for Blago’s constitutional rights played out before the Illinois Senate. A claim under the Illinois and federal constitutions that the limits on witnesses violate Blago’s due process rights would be highly likely to prevail, in my view. The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, which governs Illinois, has so ruled in a similar case in 2004. This is the type of juicy claim any criminal defense attorney would enjoy asserting.

Gensen has publicly given one reason for withdrawing from Blago representation: because Blago is not listening to his advice. He must be stewing over Blago’s continued suggestions that Gensen condones this media tour and his failure to appear before the Senate. In fact, it may be the sole reason why he resigned.

Blago knows his attorney can’t say more publicly without violating attorney-client confidentiality. It’s a perfect media strategy: claim the lawyer, who can’t publicly contradict him, is advising him to behave this way.

What is clear is that Blago stands alone in asserting that it is better for him to boycott a proceeding where his job is in real jeopardy and appear instead on television (where he then doesn’t answer any specific questions about whether he’s corrupt).

If he really had answers to the corruption allegations, wouldn’t a media tour be the time to offer them?

–Lisa Bloom, In Session anchor

NEW YORK - The inauguration was almost a week ago; by now you have heard all about the pomp and the circumstance, the parade and the parties. Since I was there, I’m tempted to give you my take on all of that too, but I won't. Because, now that I’m back from what I’m calling my “Inauguration Vacation” – that is, my week in Washington, D.C. - I want to share with you something less tangible and much more meaningful: the spirit of the whole thing. Never before have I seen so many Americans, from all class backgrounds and ethnic groups, from cities and suburbs and rural areas, from places near and far, in one place and so full of the spirit of democracy.

Crowds watch as Barack Obama is sworn in as the 44th President of the United States

We met a family of six from Ohio. The elderly parents had marched on Washington 40 years before. This time they came with their four adult daughters and woke at 4 a.m. to see Dr. King's dream fulfilled. There was the Tuskegee Airman who had received his special invitation to sit with Barack Obama on the dais. We even met a group who came from Kenya to see this distant cousin take the oath of office in America.

There were the grandparents with their grandchildren from Santa Barbara and a wonderful couple from New Mexico, tru TV/In Session fans, they told me. We chatted with a little boy from Arizona who had never experienced cold weather. He was only 10 and said his feet were numb but that it was worth it to be a part of history. And the list goes on and on, as you know, into the hundreds of thousands - people from all walks of life crowded together in the cold, sensing their collective strength.

Our new president said it best: "Our patchwork heritage is a strength, not a weakness. We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus — and non-believers. We are shaped by every language and culture, drawn from every end of this Earth, and because we have tasted the bitter swill of civil war and segregation, and emerged from that dark chapter stronger and more united, we cannot help but believe that the old hatreds shall someday pass, that the lines of tribe shall soon dissolve, that as the world grows smaller, our common humanity shall reveal itself; and that America must play its role in ushering in a new era of peace."

Somebody say Amen.

-Jami Floyd, In Session anchor

NEW YORK–Over and over again, Governor Rod Blagojevich has said that the Illinois Senate impeachment hearing is unfair because he is not permitted to call witnesses.

Gov. Rod Blagojevich

This is the same guy who’s compared himself to Gandhi and Martin Luther King, Jr. so his credibility is strained. Nevertheless, I will strongly defend anyone’s due process rights, so I decided to look into this claim.

It is false. Illinois Senate impeachment rule 15 states: “Requests of subpoenas for witnesses, documents or other materials may be made by the Governor or his counsel in the form of a verified written motion to the Chief Justice . . . “ As far as I can tell, that did not happen.

Blagojevich says that prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald and the Senate have a “cooperation agreement” by which the Senate will not call certain witnesses who are needed for the criminal trial, such as White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emmanuel, White House Senior Advisor Valerie Jarrett or Illinois Rep. Jesse Jackson, Jr.

First, under Rule 15, Blago could call witnesses on the many other articles of impeachment he faces that have nothing to do with these high profile witnesses. He hasn’t even tried.

Second, as a lawyer himself, Blagojevich should know that he could challenge any such agreement between the Senate and the prosecutor under Rule 15, as well as the state and federal constitutions, which give him the right to confront and cross-examine witnesses against him, and also entitle him to due process of the law, including the right to call witnesses.

He has not done that. Instead, he’s using the petulant child approach: “I’m going to take my marbles and go home!” That is a lousy legal approach, because as any first-year law student knows, Blago must make his motions under the hearing rules, even if denied, so that the record is preserved for later appeal. It’s the use-it-or-lose-it approach to enforcing legal rights. Not showing up is the worst possible legal strategy.

Had he made the proper motion and argued that the Senate is trampling his rights, he might have garnered the right to call any and all witnesses he chose. Instead, he complains to non-lawyers like the ladies of The View that he can’t call witnesses, hoping no one will catch him.

Blago, you’re busted. You’re misstating the law. I’d stick up for the due process rights of even the most despised amongst us, even you, accused of withholding money for a children’s hospital and trying to sell Obama’s senate seat. But don’t make up phony claims. As the late Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan said, “you’re entitled to your own opinion, but you’re not entitled to your own facts.”

–Lisa Bloom, In Session anchor

Phil Spector is expected to begin his defense today against charges that he shot actress Lana Clarkson in the mouth in the foyer of his home in February 2003. Spector is on trial again for the fatal shooting. This retrial began last October, more than a year after the jury in his first trial deadlocked 10-2 in favor of conviction for second-degree murder. Prosecutors rested their evidence last Thursday.

Phil Spector

I didn’t miss a day of the first trial which In Session (then Court TV) televised live. I couldn’t resist spending at least a few hours at the second trial so I could compare it to the first. While on vacation in Los Angeles last fall, I dropped by for a few sessions.

Some things are the same. The trial is taking place in the same courtroom, Judge Larry Fidler is still presiding, Alan Jackson continues to command the courtroom as the lead prosecutor and the state’s evidence hasn’t changed a bit. The state contends that Spector committed second-degree murder when he pointed a loaded firearm at Clarkson and fired into her mouth; the defense continues to argue that she committed suicide.

But many things are different this time. First, there are no cameras in the courtroom and the public gallery is virtually empty. Spector is no longer flanked on either side by a team of five attorneys and a paralegal. He has one new attorney, Doron Weinberg, and one assistant. He no longer arrives with two or three burly bodyguards but he does have one, who is also his driver. His wife, Rachelle, continues to accompany him daily though, on the days I was there, she was not as stylishly attired as she was when the case was televised. Not surprisingly, the past year and a half appear to have taken a physical toll on both Phil and Rachelle Spector.

The defense is expected to present much of the same evidence and maybe more of Clarkson’s state of mind in the year before she died, in an effort to show that she was depressed and, hence, suicidal.

But the hurdle for the defense is how Clarkson's blood got on Spector's white jacket. Was he standing two to three feet away and directly in front of her holding the gun, as the State contends? Or was he six or more feet away when the shot was fired, which means he couldn’t have been holding the gun? After the shooting, why did Spector wipe her mouth? Why didn’t he call 911 on one of the 14 phones in the house, three of which were within five feet of her body and why did he say “I think I killed somebody,” according to the driver who saw him two to three minutes after the shooting?

The defense should answer some of those questions in the next few weeks.

–Beth Karas, In Session correspondent