Posted on 11/12/2004 9:39:36 PM PST by nothernlights
Is the abhorrent conduct of attorney Garragos in the last few days,ie the boat plant and his obvious absence today for the verdict just a ploy for Peterson to be able to make a claim on appeal of "imcompetent counsel"?
They actually interviewed the woman juror who was replaced the day before yesterday - she said she WAS on the guilty side - she was removed because she did independent research.
The foreman who was removed, I haven't heard his reasons yet besides (from Greta) that he wanted out.
Very interesting that she said, she was voting that way. Thanks for the update. I wondered, but am not following this case close enough to listen to all the talk about it tonight.
Do you think the "experiment" in the boat will cause retrial?
"The foreman who was removed, I haven't heard his reasons yet besides (from Greta) that he wanted out."
My guess is that foreman was determined to force them to wade through his/her 12 notebooks, point by point.
And the rest said they didn't need to do that. Just a reasonable guess.
I think this slime attorney would do anything to get his client off actually.
About the boat - interesting thought. I would assume that the jurors were told whether or not they could touch any evidence they went to see, including the boat. And if they were not instructed either way (i.e. go ahead or don't touch) the defense will bring it up in certain appeal.
I do think Geragos' disgusting boat stunt complete with the fake headless pregnant Laci dummy should be cause for him to be held at the very least.. in contempt?, as he has laid his own grounds for incompetent representation. He set himself up in opening arguments with all these "facts" and "witnesseses" and "evidence" he was going to provide, and never did.
He was on OJ's team even though he wasn't the lead attorney.
I actually think you may be on the right track. It's starting to look like... what with that fast flurry of evidence requests coming out of the juryroom, that he was going to back up his notes with the whole case all over again. He was probably a "burden of proof" hardliner and was sitting with people who couldn't get past Scott placing himself at the scene where Laci and Connor were found. It isn't as if Geragos cleared that loose end up.
I did think it was funny that Falconer seemed irritated that the foreman with the dozen notebooks might write a book. He thinks he should be investigated! (Why, because he sat on the jury longer, and will have more inside info than you, therefore his book will get a higher bid, Justin?) What a twerp. Where is his "I'm a single father" - CHILD, btw?
From what I can tell he basically went with the throw a bunch of mud on the wall and see what sticks defense. That might not have been a bad idea with an unattractive client with no physical evidence against him.
I am not even sure the prosecution proved there was a crime committed.
BTW, do we actually know that Geragos put that boat there?
About the boat: yes, it's reported as being Geragos'...
http://www.14wfie.com/Global/story.asp?S=2543845&nav=3w6oT3Zb
As for the case: My husband was telling me before the verdict came down guilty (I was thinking it would be 2nd degree across the board, and am still stunned)... that it is nearly impossible to prosecute a murder anymore. Unless you have a live feed in Times Square with 1 million people watching the murder right there (and 1/3 of them will get the details wrong), everything can be explained away these days. Especially when the victim, hypothetical situation here, may have been strangled. No blood evidence to show murder.
The boat showed up after Geragos' request for a mistrial was rejected. He'd made the request after some jurors got into the actual boat that Peterson allegedly used to dump his wife's body. Jurors had been instructed not to perform such experiments. Last night, the replica boat was towed away.
I'd say yes... probably will help in the appeal. Which I think is automatic in capital cases? I'm not certain on that.
If sentenced to death, I think the appeal is automatic. If given life, I am less sure it is automatic. But I am sure this conviction will be appealed.
If the jury was instructed to not perform such experiements, it seems to me the entire jury might have been tossed unless the two who were tossed were the two that got into the boat. Of course that would have led to a mistrial.
Geragos should be disbarred. This could indeed be a ploy for an appeal.
I'm glad that you mentioned Robert Blake. That is one weird case. I don't know what to believe, because she had a lot, and I mean a lot, of enemies. Unlike Hacking and Peterson, Blake wanted to raise his daughter in a safe, healthy enviroment. Did he kill Bonnie? Beats me...
Lots of murder cases have been made on less "circumstantial" evidence, northerlights.
I doubt that any appeal will see fruition. Peterson's a dead man. He just doesn't know it yet.
Jack.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.