Wtf day three, Scott Peterson
 

Looks like the jury wants a free weekend at a nice hotel, cant think of any other reason as to why to this motherfucker is not some bodies girlfriend in the real big house by now :ak47:

The entire case is circumstantial. No direct evidence links him to the crime.

True - you can know in your heart that the guy whacked her, but can it be proved beyond a reasonable doubt? Not a chance. If he gets convicted thejury will have done the right thing morally, but the wrong thing legally (<-or whatever the word wouldbe in this case, you know what I mean).

Does it come with a Hilton?

Peterson is exactly as guilty as OJ.


j-

http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/proj...n/OJGLOVE5.jpg [IMG]http://rds.yahoo.com/S=96062883/K=scott+peterson/v=2/SID=w/l=IVS/SIG=13lmc87si/*-http%3A//www.courttv.com/graphics/photos/trials/laci-peterson/inside/lede/peterson-scott-geragos-inside-090203.jpg[/IMG]

Your attitude is exactly what is wrong with the whole the whole process, I wonder how You would feel if it was one of Your family or friend that was found in a bay with her her kid , get real man dont quote the law to Me, I gave My opion and from what I have seen and heard of this case this scum bag should be fried right now. :mad:

Now allow me to ask you, what the fuck is wrong with you? Did I say anywhere that he didn't do it? Can you point out where I said he shouldn't be convicted?

The truth of the matter is I answered your implied question of "How can it be taking three days ...". The answer is because the evidence is not direct but completely cirumstantial.

If you don't get it this time around, I'll just assume you're stupid.

I dont believe there is enough evidence to convict Scott Peterson for the death penalty, but definitely some jail time.

You must be new to CA, so I will clue you in on a couple things:

#1. We don't fry, we gas (maybe lethal injection too, don't remember, don't feel like Googling).

#2. The Night Stalker has been on Death Row for like 20 + years, and they don't even have a date set.

He has as much chance of dying of old age as he does being executed.

While we only saw snipets of the trial, it is clear that the State does not even know how she died, much less who did it.

Did he do it? Probably. Can they prove it? Not really.

You can't convict someone just because they don't know who else would have done it.

Besides, if he did, it was probably because she got pissed, and had busted him. They got into a fight, he hit her, she smacked her temple on the corner of the counter, and by a freak of nature, she died from it.

That is not murder 1 or 2, and those are the only two options.

I dont give two fucks about your assumptions about Me, the facts are very simple, in this case and if You ask any of the thousands of guys locked up right now what evidence the cops had on them they will all say circumstantial, its only because this case hit the main stream media that this saga goes on.

So you've sat through the entire trial then, and are fully advised of the situation?

You think any Jury is going to convict a man for life, or worse still take his life, based soley on cirumstantial evidence and after 30 minutes of delibiration? 3 Days is nothing.

Say what you wish, I don't think he did it. He's just a lying, cheating bastard, not a killer. Just my two cents.

Don't know who did, but from what I've seen on tv, the authorities didn't look for anyone else after they decided it was him.

I guess we'll see in a few days.

By the way, they're staying in a Super 8 hotel! Luxury? I think not.

oh? You have observed the trial? Who do you think was the most compelling witness for the state, besides Amber Frye, and why do you feel that way?

Also, since I have not been able to observe the trial (guess they have a blackout down here in LA), why do you think the defense rested already? Which of the witnesses that the defense said they would call (in opening statements) were you either really looking forward to hearing, or you were disappointed because they did not?

This is great, I was hoping I could talk to someone that was so informed about the trial.

3 days isn't a lot in a case like this. can you say "hung jury"? I know the news will be able to say it.

I think the jury is more tied up in deciding between 1st and 2nd degree murder vs innocence and guilt. It will be interesting to hear the jurys thoughts after it's over whatever the verdict is.

Just speculating... who knows...

stuff the jury didnt hear: http://www.courttv.com/trials/peterson/didnothear.html

New to CA, Yeah You could say that, I have lived in La for two Years bit of useless trivia for you, I have a good friend who is a screw (prison guard) at San Quinten and he and his fellow collegies are hoping that Peterson guy ends up on there wing lo, so do I

I think the burden is higher because of the media, he's already been convicted in the media, before he even went to trial.

Same with Dr Steven Hatfield, they haven't even got enough evidence to arrest him, however ashcroft (on larry king) and the media in general 'convicted' him of the Anthrax attacks.

I will tell you one thing where I grew up in Ireland You only have to be in the wrong place at the wrong time and no fucking Jury is needed for Your incarceration ,
internment they called it, ovioulsly We both grew up in different worlds, not saying mine was better but I just cant get My head around this thing

Yeah, I remember one time I was in a courtroom holding cell waiting for my bail hearing (my case was not circumstantial), and there was this other guy there that was being held on circumstantial evidence for the robbing of an AM/PM on Halloween night. The robber had a mask on. THe video camera could not ID him. , , , , purely circumstantial evidence.

So anyway, the DA pulled him from the cell, as he wanted to see if he could get him to plead guilty for a lower charge. The perp wasn't taking any offers, they had nothing on him. "Are you sure? You won't be getting this offer in court," said the DA. "Nope, I am innocent, you can't prove nuthin'"

Purely circumstantially, while he did have a mask on, he was wearing a tank top (call them wife beaters these days?) . . . so anyway he is wearing a tank top, and across his back from shoulder to shoulder, in big tattooed letters, is . . . . you guessed it, his name. While the security camera did not get his face, it did get the sign he was wearing on his back.

So yeah, I am sure there are dozens of guys that are innocent, and 80% are there on circumstantial evidence. However, usually with the circumstantial evidence comes DNA, gunshot residue, weapons, scratches . . . security camers to help it along.

They have none of that on Peterson.

You realize he's going to be found Not guilty?

you voted for Bush huh?

Where in Ireland . . . .anyway, yeah, we have this thing called proof beyond a reasonable doubt . . . . the state has the burden. We don't operate like they do in Ireland . . . some things better, some things not.

warren you are making yourself sound like a fucking moron. shutup and go kill some law breakers.

and you are sounding like a drugged up guy that needs to hit detox

I hate Bush lol

I believe he was referring to the Law that allowed the Army to detain suspected IRA terrorists without charge, much like the current U.S version (whom don't need proof beyond a reasonable doubt).

sorry not on anything at the moment. maybe if i get high you will start to sound a little bit smarter.

Why are you so worried about one man, circumstantial evidence and killing people.

Bush does not worry about it at all.

Belfast and Dublin, I think You would have to agree with Me only on the nature of the crime, that this would not sit well with any right mined person, if he walked.

Im not trying to sound smart

Very true

Kinda right only anybody can be assumed to be an IRA terrorist depending on the twenty year old holding the automatic rifle, remember these are kids joining an army because there are no other options workwise and have no idea what the fuck they are fighting for or about.

warren can't think of a reason this guy is not in jail. Other than the jury wants a free weekend in a hotel.


that is all

Hey, I agreed that OJ probably did it, but I also watched that entire trial and knew they would find him innocent because LAPD lied too much in the trial.

There are rules, and if you can't follow them, you lose. It is a game.

It won't surprise me at all if he walks.

lol just read the script under Your name

and you are doing a fantastic job of it :thumbsup

An attorney used that as a description of me when he was filing a complaint against me with the California Department of Insurance.

I was making his staff cry I guess. Was making him look really bad.

My ego is well intact , I dont need to get excited from the responces from here

I find myself agreeing with you an awful lot these days. I'm not sure what that means.

Yeah, I was noticing that earlier . . . . wasn't sure if it was only me.

You're Irish, you are entitled to that. Don't let anyone let you forget that.

lol, Why did his staff see him him with his pants down

LMFAO

Long story . . . . probably boring to most, but was one of the high points of my career

Ok np, well if You going to Santa monica maybe you can tell Me, it should be easy for You to see Me I will be with My wife
http://www.martinawarren.com

I am sorry, but you think that if I have a choice of talking to you, or talking to her, I am going to opt to go with the former? Maybe ask her to ask me the story. :)

Marked

:Graucho