REDWOOD CITY, Calif. — In tearful testimony, Scott Peterson's (search) family and friends pleaded with jurors to spare his life, contending that he
was mistakenly convicted of killing his pregnant wife, Laci.Posted on 12/07/2004 6:15:31 AM PST by crushelits
Witnesses: Jury Wrongly Convicted Peterson
REDWOOD CITY, Calif. — In tearful testimony, Scott Peterson's (search) family and friends pleaded with jurors to spare his life, contending that he was mistakenly convicted of killing his pregnant wife, Laci.
Defense witnesses have already testified that Peterson sang to seniors on Sundays, distributed food and clothes in Tijuana and that he was a good friend and loving son.
On the fifth day of the trial's penalty phase, Peterson's relatives questioned the jury's verdict.
"I don't believe he's guilty," said his uncle, John Lathamke to see him die. It would tear our family apart."
But jurors showed no expression, some even looking away or toward the ground as Latham spoke.
Testimony in the seven-month-old trial's penalty phase was set to continue Tuesday and run into the next day before closing arguments. Jurors were expected to begin deliberating Thursday whether to sentence Peterson to life without parole or the death penalty.
Peterson was convicted Nov. 12 of one count of first-degree murder in the death of his pregnant wife, Laci, and one count of second-degree murder for the killing of her fetus.
Prosecutors say he smothered or strangled Laci Peterson (search) in their Modesto home on or around Christmas Eve 2002, then dumped her body into San Francisco Bay. The remains of the victims were discovered about four months later a few miles from where Peterson claims to have been fishing alone the day his wife vanished.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
It was a literal question. Not an accusation. Let me ask it again. What do you know about juries. I'm not asking for your qualifications or your experience. Although that is interesting to know. I too was a reporter. Anyhow, please, this thread could use some insight on what happened with this jury and you seem the perfect person to sort it out for us.
You don't need physical evidence for a conviction.
He's blessing us with his presence, there's a big difference. :)
"...and one count of second-degree murder for the killing of her foetus."
Calling even a full term baby a foetus must be required in the AP style manual.
In a recent story of floods in western NC the AP writer said that a woman who was within days of giving birth was okay after being dragged from flood waters except that "she was mourning the loss of her foetus." b
So you've posted an article of yet another person, besides yourself, of course, who doesn't have the facts.
Your point?
Sibilantly.
Who framred him? What was their beef with Scott? Why isn't there ONE CLUE or even ONE HINT as to their existence?
The English language is masculine when you don't know the gender. But thanks for the information.
Sublime.
He looked guilty because he is guilty.
There is no actual physical evidence to tie him to the murders.
Yawn, not needed. I almost get tired of telling people that.
Exactly.
For instance, he wouldn't allow ANY pictures of Laci as a baby or child; but they've seen MILLIONS of picturs of little Snot on the golf course, etc.
He's let Geragos get away with so much stuff, even I was surprised.
You and I both know there's nothing here to appeal.
Scott has at least one enemy who wanted to frame him
or was it a stranger who just happened to kidnap and
murder Laci, then decide to frame the husband by taking
a chance that the husband COULD have dumped her body
in the bay during his fishing trip?
And you'd be worried about hurting somebody's feelings while they were out looking for your missing wife?
(folks tend to piss their jeans once dead, even if they die by strangulation, so where are the pee stains in their house?)
Never heard of a "soft kill," eh?
All you've proven is that you are GUESSING at things.
When I cheated on my first wife....and my second....I lied to my girlfriends....And my wives and friends about where I was, if I was married, and whatever else...so did my cheating wives.
Well, now I guess we all realize how you can associate with Scott.
Don't forget he was a good waiter, too!
I've already posted what happened with this jury: Justin was removed because he was a publicity hound; the lady ws removed because she did her own investigation, which, if you were a reporter, you have to know is against the judge's instructions, and the third guy ASKED to be removed after the jury complained that he would NOT deliberate, which I am sure you know is yet another instruction from the judge.
Don't you live near there? Was it you?
It's the law.
Live with it.
And it most certainly is NOT appealable on that basis.
ROFLMAO..........that is so true!
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.