We know for sure that the first (after deliberation) juror dismissed (the asian lady) was dismissed for misconduct, doing her own research. It’s been suggested that the second juror (the former foreman) wouldn’t let the jurors vote. if both are true, I don’t see a succesful appeal. Adding to that was that the judge in this case was specifically bought out of retirement by teh Supremem court specifically to hear this case, so I suspect that he’ll have dotted all the 'I’s and crossed all 't’s.
I wonder if Peterson’s not testifying contributed to the verdict. It’s not supposed to- there is a jury instruction that the juryis not to make any “hurtful or harmful inference” from the defendant’s not testifying, but I think it’s human nature to want to hear from the defendant’s own lips that he didn’t do it. I can understand the decision not to in this case, though- the DA would have had a field day cross-examining him.
If Scott had gotten on the stand he might as well have cut his own throat. The prosecution would have spent three weeks asking his about lie after lie.
Especially after Amber’s tape, which pretty much nailed him as a lying scumbag.
The trashy tabloids have just lost half of their grist. Who will they barbecue next? :rolleyes:
I’m a bit surprised. I pegged him from the day she went missing, but I’m surprised that he was found guilty, considering the absence of any forensic evidence, eyewitness testimony, anything. The prosecution’s case consisted entirely of “he sure acts suspicious”. I would’ve had a reasonable doubt.
I’ve merged the two Peterson threads.
Cajun Man
for the SDMB
I agree. I think that Scotty is guilty as hell, but the prosecution had a shyte case. Most of the evidence was circumstantial at best. The only thing that they proved was that he had an affair and lied. Imagine that.
As for the media, on to the next trial I guess. What about the case where the guy lied about medical school. Think that’s juicy enough? :rolleyes:
Doesn’t the Michael Jackson trial start in January? They’re probably praying for that. Also there’s that dude in St. Lake City.
Then again, we can wait for another cute white female to be murdered, so we can go crazy over them and make it the most important news story in the universe.
I’ve heard similar comments as to why this story is getting so much media coverage (it’s not as though murders are rare). I believe it’s because a) Laci was very close to bringing her son into the world; b) there wasn’t a lot in the way of physical evidence - primarily circumstantial. (Remember the OJ trial?) At any rate, I believe the verdict was just. The media still has another couple of weeks to focus on the sentence.
Posted by AskNott
Posted by** Harborwolf**
Posted by 5que
Yes. The unfortunately named Mark Hacking
…or are her 15minutes all used up?WHY was she represented by a lawyer? Is there a book deal coming down?
Scott’s idiot parents: I don’t feel any sympathy for them…they blew their savings buying italian suits for Mr. Geragos…they knew their "boY’ was guilty as hell.
Poor Laci’s parents…they at least have some closure. Those photos of Conor’s never-to-be nursery were so sad!
I hope they Amber Frye him.