Laci Peterson

I was watching the piece E! THS did on the Peterson case I literally felt my heart sink when Laci's stepdad mentioned that they were doing jury selection when they should be celebrating Connor's First Birthday had he lived.

I literally wanted to puke when they interviewed an excused juror who stated "Oh yes, he's so handsome, smooth, and sophisticated..." She went on and on and on about him. Yeah biatch, because it's so flattering when you kill your wife and child.

[swissmiss04]

Even though I think he's a bastard for cheating on his pregnant wife (this part has at least been proven), I wonder if this will prevent him from getting a fair trial. I know if I were on the jury I'd have a lot less sympathy/empathy for him knowing he's sort of an a$$ anyways.

My mother and i have been discussing this case and she thinks he is innocent.

I haven't formed an opinion about it because to me it just doesnt seem like it all fits like the oppsing counsel would want it to to nail him for it...seems like something is missing and the missing peice is big.


Now if you ask me about micheal jackson.....oh i can go off on that freak of nature ( HEY NOW I DO LIKe HIS MUSIC ...so no bashing me)

[justamom]

Garagos says they have a witness that puts Laci in the boat. This COULD explain the hair on the pliers. (Or whatever tool it was.)

Prosecutors say Scott told 2 people he was playing golf the day she disappeared and one or two others he was fishing.

Hard to know where this is going or what the truth is. (I think he's guilty at this point, but am open to the evidence.)

exactly! it seems once they have powerful and very crediable evidence then they find something else that seems to disputes what they had 20 minutes earlier...it seems to go back and forth with them and all the time Garregos is poking holes thru the states case.

But what do we know were all the ones just looking inside and don't know whats really going on behind the scenes

[norcalchick]

what bothers me is the neighbors who say they saw her walking the dog the day she was missing. i think that they think they saw her cause she's always walking their dog. it just throws things out of place. cause you have the evidence of scott going to the bay area to go fishing and the bodies were found near by and all of that, but then you have the neighbors saying, oh no, i saw her walking the dog at that time... thanks a lot people. i think he did it. a lot of it adds up, but i guess it's not enough. the affair, where he was in the bay area, lying about things, going to (i think) san diego and chanign his hair color. it was getting so close and things were adding up about the case, that he went down there and made himself look a lil different so he could escape down to mexico.

[sageofages]

Originally posted by swissmiss04
Even though I think he's a bastard for cheating on his pregnant wife (this part has at least been proven), I wonder if this will prevent him from getting a fair trial. I know if I were on the jury I'd have a lot less sympathy/empathy for him knowing he's sort of an a$$ anyways.

Interesting sidenote...I just saw a story on cnn by a NYC paper (can't remember which one) journalist writing a story about cheating spouses. The times when men (who cheat more than women are most likely to cheat is when their wives are pregnant and immediately after the baby is born. The next most frequent time is when the children graduate HS and leave home.

So for cheating on her while she was pregnant, seems "normal" as far as louses...er spouses go.

[DZHBrown]

I've been torn on this one. His actions seem to mimic those of a guilty man (and guilty of more than cheating), but as far as hard evidence goes....where is it? I understand the state probably has a lot of info that they have not shared with the public - at least I hope so. I'm very curious to see how it all unravels.

[valkyrie]

*bump*

Wow, these jurors are dropping like flies. It looks like a third juror was removed today.

Here's what BAFFLES me -- yesterday when a juror was removed and replaced with an alternate, the jury was instructed to RESTART deliberations. How is that even possible?

I have not worked in criminal law but to me it would seem if they are replacing jurors , because their "dropping like flies", that would only cause the verdict to go in an opposite way causing a victory on the defense side. To me it seems like it would weaken the prosecution side because they have to start from the beginning in deliberations everytime they change up the jury.


My mother said t o me the other day She doesn't think he did it only because he isn't smart enough.... I think those are the ones we really need to focus our concerns on .......my heart and mind says he did it. But i am not in the courtroom nor am i seeing evidence....but to retry this case ...all i have to say is i am soooo glad i don't live up in nor cal so i can't be called.

[adpialumcsuc]

I see something really wrong when the foreman gets booted. I am not in law but I find that really odd.

[James]

When I am watching the talking heads on TV it seems that more of the women are convinced he killed her, where more men are aren't sure.

I wonder why that is?

The prosecution hasn't really proven its case from what I have seen. Its more like, well we don't have any other suspects and the man is having an affair so he must have done it.

[AGDee]

I agree, James. I've tried to watch this carefully and if I were a juror, I don't think I could find him guilty "beyond a reasonable doubt". The evidence seems circumstantial.

[AlphaSigOU]

Originally posted by adpialumcsuc
I see something really wrong when the foreman gets booted. I am not in law but I find that really odd.

Having been a jury foreman once, it's a thankless job but one outta the twelve has to keep order and tally everyone's votes. I wouldn't see it as the end of the world, though... if however they are hopelessly deadlocked on one or all the counts, the judge will do his best to keep the jury going until they reach a unanimous verdict. There is a finite number of alternates, though - once you use 'em up and the jury gets knocked down to less than 12, then it's a mistrial.

The reason why they have to restart deliberations is because the alternate jurors need to be brought up to speed. While the alternates sit in the courtroom they do not participate in jury deliberations. In the final instructions to the jury, the judge instructs the alternates to maintain themselves available at all times to the bailiff in the event one of them has to be called to replace a primary juror.

[AGDee]

I also found it interesting that the foreman who was booted is a doctor AND a lawyer! It seems to me that he would be smart enough to not break any rules...