Replies

Scott Peterson is in prison. His wife and unborn son were found decomposing in water.

He cleaned up the scene of death so good that there was absolutely no evidence of murder.

Yet, an intelligent jury was able to piece together the circumstantial evidence beyond a reasonable doubt and find him guilty of the crime he committed.

Yep. The Scott Peterson jury actually took their time going through all the evidence. They asked questions and wanted to view parts of testimony and evidence. They also had no cause of death and only the decomposed torso of Laci-—months after she went missing. Yet, as you pointed out, they actually pieced together all the circumstantial evidence and came to the logical conclusion.

This jury did not. They didn’t see a smoking gun or even a gun at all. They expected some CSI moment, which never came. They knew there was a dead baby, but because the baby was so badly decomposed, there was no cause of death. The duct tape on the baby’s skull, inside plastic bags, and tossed in the swamp like garbage apparently weren’t compelling enough. The smell of decomposition coming from HER car—noticed by multiple people—and the fact that HER child was missing for 30 days without her reporting it wasn’t compelling enough for this jury. However, the defense mentioning that she was a good mother, that Caylee most likely drowned in the pool WAS compelling to them.

To hear that alternate say that he didn’t even believe about the decomp smell in the car told me enough about this jury. I wonder if the judge had allowed them to smell those air samples from the trunk, if this jury would still think that wasn’t enough.

The fact that the REASON they didn’t have the cause of death they were seeking was because the woman on trial was the very one that did every thing she could to hinder the investigation, seems to have escaped their attention. Casey definitely had a jury of her peers. *sigh*