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 ...
The 100 people quoted in that article were released from jail. Your not released from jail because the death penalty is ruled unconstitutional.
Now on this we can agree! There is something "not right" with this family -- and she just may be at the heart of it.
Whatever they are saying is only turning the jury off; all they keep hearing is that Scott was a good golf player and that it will tear his family apart if he is given the DP.
Well, what's the jury left to think when none of them EVER say that losing Laci and Conner tore their family part? Is a family only torn apart when CERTAIN people are lost?
Anyway, not one word of this stuff has anything to do with mitigating circumstances.
Absolutely. Spending time hoping and praying the jury will forget that Sharon Rocha said she went to say goodbye to Laci's casket and was glad that Laci was in there with Conner until she remembered she didn't have any ARMS to hold him.
I'm for promoting the "punishment fitting the crime" thing. I think our sea-faring friend should be taken out to sea, strung up on the highest yardarm and beaten with golf clubs. Thoughts?
It's humorous yes, but difficult
to wade through all the misinformation
posturing as fact posted by some truly uninformed
folks with attitudes and personal issues.
Totally discredited; it says a lot about you that you keep repeating misinformation.
Other witnesses that morning saw Lacy chatting with several low-life's who were standing beside an old van near her driveway that morning....her dog still on a leash...
Absolutely NOT true.
That case was about a fire and no apparent motive.
That guy was railroaded.
Snott has had a million dollar defense team.
Yes, it does matter; you stated as fact 400 and are unable to back that statement up.
It counts as yet another false statement you have made.
You're never going to get into law school.
Have you actually heard ANY mitigating factors in this penalty phase?
But in the purely legal sense, he is innocent.
All I want is for my legal system to fess up and admit he was convicted because he failed as a husband and father....And that he should suffer death because of it.
To me that is fitting justice....It's a standard that I hold myself to.
TOO FUNNY.
In a totally legal verdict, he has been found GUILTY.
That is the creepiest part of the whole story.
We have yet to hear from Scott, his family etc about how LACI's life and death and the death of the baby effected the family. It is like she never existed! That Scott is the only person they saw.
Heck, they may have killed her as a group, they are that cold blooded. /sarcasm.
Listen, I don't make statements I can't back up, unlike you; now we find out that you're misrepresented those facts?
I'm not hear to discuss your cases; I'm talking about the Scott Peterson case.
What or where is the evidence -- ANY PIECE -- that points to anybody except Scott Peterson?
And I beg to differ about the DP; this was a premeditated crime in which he had to know that when he killed her he was killing his son.
Give him the needle.
Oh, dear. You say "in question" as if all one must do is pose a question, never mind "the answer", as in Amber's testimony was verified; it didn't rest on her say-so.
Next faulty point, please.
It was discredited because she stated there was a football game on TV and there wasn't a football game on TV ON THAT DAY! So maybe she was confused?
Would you want THAT on the stand in your case? She would have been ripped into confetti.
Manson had his insane and evil reasons.
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.