Posted on 11/12/2004 11:24:19 AM PST by Hillary's Lovely Legs
News Alert: Scott Peterson Verdict to be announced today at 4:00 Eastern Time.
of David Westerfield.
Smart man, your dad.
Upstairs of building M5, the building that he shot up. I was not in my office, and I was very lucky that I was not in my office. I had just finished a meeting, and I was going over some classified data with a co-worker in her office.
Someone came by the office yelling "Get out! A man is in our building shooting people!"
We both ran out of there without the classified material. She ran back after it, and she did get out safely.
We learned that our lives are more important than the data. We could have left the data there.
Farley killed a guy whose office was only a few down from mine. He shot almost every computer around my office, but the police said he didn't come into mine. Mine was left the way I had left it.
It still seems like it was only a few days ago. Hard to believe it's been so long ago.
Interesting. I hadn't been following the case in all of it's details, but my gut feeling was that he "accidently" killed Laci in their home on Dec 23rd in a fit of rage, probably following a nasty argument (about his sideline squeeze?).
There must have been strong evidence of premeditation/planning for a CA jury to convict. Amazing! Maybe we're not doomed after all.
O.J.II found guilty. Maybe there is hope for California.
Doesn't a death sentence bring an automatic appeal (a freebie)?
He knew it was highly likely that witnesses would be found who could testify that he was there, since he was (when he dumped the body). Pretty simple, really.
.
NEVER FORGET
HILLARY's jailed P.I. unable to to help JACKSON, but GERAGOS will
http://www.Freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1025375/posts
NEVER FORGET
.
"Thank God you weren't on the jury!"
Well, now that's different. If I'd had to sit there for three months to listen to all of that I might be steamed enough to want to kick his butt just for that sneer of his.
I doubt I'd be very objective at all were I sitting there. It's far easier to be analytical from a hundred miles away.
he was "trolling "her
sick bastard
Bubba anxiously awaits Scotts arrival. Scott should make him a good wife.
So you think I'm stupid because my opinion differs from yours? I don't think the prosecution proved their case. I could not sentence someone to death when there's only circumstantial evidence. Maybe sentencing them to 25 to life, but not the death penalty. What irrefutable proof does anyone have that he did this? Judge Napolitano even said the prosecution didn't have a case.
I was going to ask you if you would prefer the abbreviated version ET but then I figured out Evil Arminian Twin is EAT. I think I will stick with Rev unless the situation warrants a "heightened state of levity"
Is Blake ever going to come to trial? or just keep changing judges until he dies first.
Judge Napolitano wasn't at the trial every day.He isn't always right.And unless there is an eyewitness/tape of the crime,nobody but the murderer knows what happened.
If every case had to be "proved" with "irrefutable" evidence,almost nobody would ever be convicted.
I hope and pray that you NEVER serve on any jury!
Good grief. Did you follow this trial at all?
The jurors don't have to have "irrefutable proof," just guilt beyond a "reasonable doubt." "Irrefutable proof" would be a video tape of the murder and a confession. Thank goodness juries in the country aren't held to your standards... there'd be even more murderers walking the streets. No, instead, juries are allowed to use common sense as well.
I guess the physical proof of the bodies being at the alibi site, the hundreds of lies that the judge told the jury they could use toward a "guilty conscience," the circumstantial evidence and the possible motive(s) were more than enough for twelve "reasonable" people to override the theory of the "Satanic, homeless band of killers" that Geragos said tried to "frame" Scott Peterson for some unknown reason.
Imagine that... convicting a murderer without the crime being caught on videotape.
It was in Redwood City. That makes it a blue area.
I completely agree. The media had him guilty from day one - before even searching for evidence or bodies. (And we know how reliable the old media is!) But yes, it is scary how someone can be convicted on such slim circumstancial evidence. And after the judge conveniently removed 2 jurors who were likely leaning not-guilty. He is a reprehensible human being - but that shouldn't count for more than the lack of facts in this case. OJ was not guilty with tons of real evidence, Scott is guilty with very little......Scary is the word for it!
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.