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 ...
OMG, you really ARE that stupid.
They have him ON TAPE.....his OWN VOICE.
I have said all along that he is Guilty, but I still stand by the fact that all of the evidence was NOT heard. If it was your kid you would want ALL evidence to be heard. Not just the evidence that makes him look guilty.
Wouldnt proof of the boat tipping be legal evidence? Why wasnt it shown? If it wasnt legal evidence, why not?
Now you're being totally silly.
How would this be done and how many times
and under what exact conditions? Would you
have the jurors stand on shore for countless
demonstrations? If so, all it would take
is ONE successful dumping.
Her book deal won't be grounds for appeal.
In fact, there won't be a successful appeal in this case. It's not going to be overturned.
I own several, how many do you own?
ARe you saying a tipped over boat wouldnt sink?
Nope, but some do, and some don't. Depends on the boat. But the real point is that your contention that it would tip over is goofy.
If a different guy on Fox news had showed how it could be done, what would you be saying now?
I've heard it called "CSI Syndrome". Many people apparently believe that circumstantial evidence isn't evidence.
OK,
What evidence that would help point to his innocence has not been heard?
Pay atention to ALL of the facts to you too. All of the facts are ignored by the mainstream media, the Judge and the Jury.
Your use of the term "infant Conner" indicates that you have fallen for the media hype. Last I check people are named when they are born and an infant is born. The term "infant" and a name is NOT given to the 1.4 or so million humans who are not born and/or named due to the mothers choice to murder them.
Also the logical argument here about where the bodies were found is precisely that there was NO coincidence.
Hypothetically, it you were the murderer (not Scott Peterson) and you watched tv and saw inumerable videos of authorities searching that bay, wouldn't that be exactly where you would dispose of the body?
This case is full of holes.
yes it is me Scott...LOL
I think there was one after that, wasn't there? And what do you know about juries?
LOL......exactly!
Or maybe it's Jackie or Janey!
Erm
ah,
Howlin' knows a LOT about juries darlin' ;)
There were two people kicked off the jury at the very end, in the last weeks, correct?
Correct.
One woman for getting caught doing her own investigation on line.
The jury foreman for unspecified reasons...
there is a gag order in effect, but it has
been reported that he refused to allow the
jury to take a vote.
Thanks for asking that. We can both wait forever for the answer........LOL.
Evidence entered at trial are the only facts that are relevant, not the endless spin by talking heads.
Read up on what constitutes evidence.
Someone needs a bit of education.
I love those shows, (Not CSI, but the others with real cases, like Forensics Files, Cold case, American Justice, etc) and it's true that the science can be extremely helpful, but it's not necessary.
So you are saying that someone killed Laci and held on to her body until they knew where the authorities were looking for the body and then dumped it?
Near Mexico. He was arrested in San Diego before/after playing golf.
And how would you know exactly where he went so you could dump them in the bay so they would wash ashore to implicate him?
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.