How the hell can anyone collect any physical evidence? Scott Peterson LIVED in that house. His hairs and cells, even blood, are supposed to be there. Lacy's too.
The defense would be jumping all over a prosecutor who would introduce blood from the Peterson house, blood that, logically, would be in their own home.
Had a stranger broken into the Peterson house and abducted a protesting Lacy, there might well have been strange hairs, DNA, etc., from someone that shouldn't have been there.
Although Scott cleaned that house thoroughly that the bleach stink almost gagged the cops when they first entered, well, hey, the man has a right to clean his own house, right?
"Circumstantial" is a liberal word, and they try to put an undeserved disdain on it. Scott Peterson goes to the very spot TWICE, where his wife and unborn son's body eventually turns up. How lucky is this, the poor man who had NO idea what happened to his wife yet he scans the waters where someone else evidently dumped her. What a coincidence!
Using this physical evidence standard while eschewing circumstantial evidence that is overwhelming, effectively allows spouses across the land to murder their loved ones with impunity because, hey, this stuff is supposed to be in MY house.
Worked on the Jonbenet Ramsey case, too.
You are so right.
If my husband smothered me tonight and dumped me somewhere, where would the evidence be?