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 ...
I dont have a "Blog" I have a news and politics website that is receiving 100,000 hits per month in less than 6 months of existence. How is your site doing??
The what of his what? I see no goodness and no heart. I didn't now about the requirement for graduation. I guess that made him a part of a fairly large group? Imagine that. I guess that negates the defense's intent of that one.
Nor have I ever heard of a judge keeping a juror on the panel who refuses to DELIBERATE, have you?
On the first point, certainly not. On the second, if they refuse to deliberate because the other jurors refuse to deliberate his (his/her for battin 1000) points, then it is another matter. I'm sorry, I don't have the particulars of the juror that refused to diliberate. But there must be more to it than that. What, they just said, sorry, I'm not interested? My guide has always been, when something sounds that odd, either someone is really that stupid or there is something else going on.
By the way, My "Blog" was the first to report that Dan Rather was retiring. I actually reported it two days before he announced, so maybe I know a little more than you give me credit for.
Look it up on FR, I posted it on here the Sunday before he announced.
Simply splendid!
I didn't miss this point, howlin also brought it up.
Are you two saying that the prosecution called in witnesses to testify that Scott was where HE SAID he was, the scene of the body's disposal? That seems like a waste of time to me.
Of course if you two are referring to hearsay bantered about by tv talking heads...need I say more?
Geragos was hired for a million bucks "just because" of his name. Don't forget, either way, it will get him into the history books as a "double murder" case. Win or lose, he could care less. That's not his job.
Moreover, the convictions were not reversed "because they were convicted because of circumstantial evidence." You have your concepts mixed up here. Circumstantial evidence is not grounds for reversal.
Many convictions are reversed for evidentiary errors, but most have to do with the hearsay rule or similar transaction evidence wrongly admitted. Many are reversed for errors in the charge to the jury. There was a wholesale commutation in Illinois because of fraud in the state crime lab. In fact it seems that eyewitness identification of a stranger is far less reliable than solid physical (albeit circumstantial) evidence.
If you really wanted to promote your site you would put it in your tag line.
I somewhat missed your point on this one. You did call for a credible source. Sorry.
But forcing an adult person to take a shot is too inhumane. Perhaps the state should use lethal doses of ingestible heroin. Then the criminals will accelerate their crimes in hopes of a happy ending. Thus fomenting a crime wave.
Such are liberal fantasies. Hopefully this illustration may disabuse them of this notion.
The media has practically criminalized him, so to use this as a appeal issue is likely if not certain.
I won't lose sleep over it, cuz I simply add it to my list of things California has done to get my attention.
The bodies weren't suppose to submerge!!! Scott was as free as a bird until that occurred!! You missed the point AGAIN!!
Any Google Search, a USA Today Search, even the unreliable NY Times.com search.
Quit trying to make this thread about YOU.
#265 ... you're talking to yourself.
Heck...I said Dan would retire two months ago...(Who cares).
Oh, I think Geragos cares a great deal about winning.
This case is killing him.
Recall that he promised to prove Scaught innocent,
even after declaring his guilt several times on LKL.
IIRC, it was Jackie Peterson who chose Geragos,
then mortgaged their house to pay for his legal services.
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.