Scott Peterson

Chat about anything and everything... (well almost anything) Whether it be the front porch or the pot belly stove or news of interest or a topic of your liking, this is the place to post it.

Moderator: S2k Moderators

Scott Peterson, Guilty or Innocent

Guilty of 1st or 2nd degree murder
31
82%
Not guilty of murder
7
18%
Dont care
0
No votes
 
Total votes: 38

Message
Author
Anonymous

#21 Postby Anonymous » Sat Nov 06, 2004 1:44 pm

He did it. But with CALIFORNIA....WHO KNOWS.
0 likes   

Brent
S2K Supporter
S2K Supporter
Posts: 38118
Age: 37
Joined: Sun May 16, 2004 10:30 pm
Location: Tulsa Oklahoma
Contact:

#22 Postby Brent » Sat Nov 06, 2004 2:39 pm

I've got a bad feeling this will be just like O.J. Everyone thought he was and it came back not guilty.
0 likes   
#neversummer

Brent
S2K Supporter
S2K Supporter
Posts: 38118
Age: 37
Joined: Sun May 16, 2004 10:30 pm
Location: Tulsa Oklahoma
Contact:

#23 Postby Brent » Sat Nov 06, 2004 2:41 pm

Skywatch_NC wrote:Heard this morning on the news that the jurors have been sequestered at a hotel for the weekend...no family visits allowed, no newspaper/tabloid reading, no TV watching...hope they have a nice stack of books to read then, some knitting, video games, etc., so they won't go stir crazy! :wink:

Eric


They can read and watch TV, it just can't be related to Scott Peterson. :)
0 likes   
#neversummer

ColdFront77

#24 Postby ColdFront77 » Sat Nov 06, 2004 6:18 pm

NULL VOTE (more on the side of "not guilty") because these issues are usually very annoying.
0 likes   

User avatar
yoda
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 7874
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2004 3:51 pm
Location: Springfield VA (20 mins south of DC)
Contact:

#25 Postby yoda » Sat Nov 06, 2004 6:23 pm

Skywatch_NC wrote:
streetsoldier wrote:There may be a problem with a clear verdict...one of the jurors is both an M.D. and an attorney, and as I understand things, he is the foreman.

This person will have much to say about evidence, both from a legal point of view AND a medical/forensic one. Ergo, I don't envision the jury coming out all that soon. :larrow:


It would have seemed then that would have made that person inelligible for a murder trial jury.

Eric


Who? The lawyer or the MD? That is what pre-emptive strikes are for...
0 likes   

User avatar
coriolis
Retired Staff
Retired Staff
Posts: 8314
Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2003 10:58 pm
Location: Muncy, PA

#26 Postby coriolis » Sat Nov 06, 2004 8:00 pm

murder 2 would have to be nothing more than a compromise in order to get SOMETHING because it seems to me that there's lots of evidence that he had it all planned out.
0 likes   
This space for rent.

User avatar
yoda
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 7874
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2004 3:51 pm
Location: Springfield VA (20 mins south of DC)
Contact:

#27 Postby yoda » Sat Nov 06, 2004 8:02 pm

coriolis wrote:murder 2 would have to be nothing more than a compromise in order to get SOMETHING because it seems to me that there's lots of evidence that he had it all planned out.


There certainly was a lot of circumstantial evidence... :eek:
0 likes   

User avatar
Skywatch_NC
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 10949
Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2003 9:31 pm
Location: Raleigh, NC
Contact:

#28 Postby Skywatch_NC » Sat Nov 06, 2004 8:10 pm

yoda wrote:
Skywatch_NC wrote:
streetsoldier wrote:There may be a problem with a clear verdict...one of the jurors is both an M.D. and an attorney, and as I understand things, he is the foreman.

This person will have much to say about evidence, both from a legal point of view AND a medical/forensic one. Ergo, I don't envision the jury coming out all that soon. :larrow:


It would have seemed then that would have made that person inelligible for a murder trial jury.

Eric


Who? The lawyer or the MD? That is what pre-emptive strikes are for...
0 likes   

User avatar
yoda
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 7874
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2004 3:51 pm
Location: Springfield VA (20 mins south of DC)
Contact:

#29 Postby yoda » Sat Nov 06, 2004 8:19 pm

Am I missing something? Or are you just agreeing with me?
0 likes   

User avatar
Skywatch_NC
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 10949
Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2003 9:31 pm
Location: Raleigh, NC
Contact:

#30 Postby Skywatch_NC » Sat Nov 06, 2004 8:22 pm

yoda wrote:Am I missing something? Or are you just agreeing with me?


Bill's original post...one of the jurors is BOTH a doctor AND a lawyer is how I understand it. :wink:
0 likes   

User avatar
yoda
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 7874
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2004 3:51 pm
Location: Springfield VA (20 mins south of DC)
Contact:

#31 Postby yoda » Sat Nov 06, 2004 8:32 pm

Skywatch_NC wrote:
yoda wrote:Am I missing something? Or are you just agreeing with me?


Bill's original post...one of the jurors is BOTH a doctor AND a lawyer is how I understand it. :wink:


Ah ok... I thought you were questioning how they were not sent off the jury. :D
0 likes   

User avatar
streetsoldier
Retired Staff
Retired Staff
Posts: 9705
Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2003 11:33 pm
Location: Under the rainbow

#32 Postby streetsoldier » Sat Nov 06, 2004 8:43 pm

Usually in capital cases, one needs three of four criteria for conviction.

These are motive (which the judge threw out of the deliberations), means, opportunity, and fruits/evidentiary property.

The fruits (Amber Frye? Living out a bachelor lifestyle unencumbered? Financial?), IMHO, will be the final determinor.
0 likes   

User avatar
yoda
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 7874
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2004 3:51 pm
Location: Springfield VA (20 mins south of DC)
Contact:

#33 Postby yoda » Sat Nov 06, 2004 8:44 pm

streetsoldier wrote:Usually in capital cases, one needs three of four criteria for conviction.

These are motive (which the judge threw out of the deliberations), means, opportunity, and fruits/evidentiary property.

The fruits (Amber Frye? Living out a bachelor lifestyle unencumbered? Financial?), IMHO, will be the final determinor.


Correct. But I found a lot of the evidence presented in the case was circumstantial.
0 likes   

User avatar
streetsoldier
Retired Staff
Retired Staff
Posts: 9705
Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2003 11:33 pm
Location: Under the rainbow

#34 Postby streetsoldier » Sat Nov 06, 2004 8:48 pm

The judge also insructed the jury to take a broad view of the evidence...if the circumstantial evidence points to guilt, vote that way; if it goes to innocence, so vote.

This one will be a contest of evidence...one stack for guilt, one for innocence, and which one is larger or more compelling.
0 likes   

User avatar
Skywatch_NC
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 10949
Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2003 9:31 pm
Location: Raleigh, NC
Contact:

#35 Postby Skywatch_NC » Sat Nov 06, 2004 8:53 pm

yoda wrote:
Skywatch_NC wrote:
yoda wrote:Am I missing something? Or are you just agreeing with me?


Bill's original post...one of the jurors is BOTH a doctor AND a lawyer is how I understand it. :wink:


Ah ok... I thought you were questioning how they were not sent off the jury. :D


Well, yes that too....I would think that this particular person who is both a lawyer and a doctor would have been inelligible right off from having been interviewed by a lawyer for possible jury selection...and then I saw your post about pre-emptive strikes. :)
0 likes   

User avatar
yoda
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 7874
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2004 3:51 pm
Location: Springfield VA (20 mins south of DC)
Contact:

#36 Postby yoda » Sat Nov 06, 2004 9:37 pm

Skywatch_NC wrote:
yoda wrote:
Skywatch_NC wrote:
yoda wrote:Am I missing something? Or are you just agreeing with me?


Bill's original post...one of the jurors is BOTH a doctor AND a lawyer is how I understand it. :wink:


Ah ok... I thought you were questioning how they were not sent off the jury. :D


Well, yes that too....I would think that this particular person who is both a lawyer and a doctor would have been inelligible right off from having been interviewed by a lawyer for possible jury selection...and then I saw your post about pre-emptive strikes. :)


Well according to VA law, a lawyer on both sides has 3 pre-emptive strikes. After that, a juror may only be struck if both the prosecutor and defense attorney agree on it. There is a Supreme Court case on this as well.
0 likes   

GalvestonDuck
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 15941
Age: 57
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2002 8:11 am
Location: Galveston, oh Galveston (And yeah, it's a barrier island. Wanna make something of it?)

#37 Postby GalvestonDuck » Mon Nov 08, 2004 9:20 am

Bumping this up so it won't be hard to find when the time comes.

Maybe we'll learn the verdict today.
0 likes   

User avatar
therock1811
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 5163
Age: 40
Joined: Thu May 15, 2003 2:15 pm
Location: Kentucky
Contact:

#38 Postby therock1811 » Mon Nov 08, 2004 9:45 am

Well I voted guilty. As to which count, I couldn't say for sure.
0 likes   

User avatar
alicia-w
S2K Supporter
S2K Supporter
Posts: 6400
Joined: Tue Aug 12, 2003 2:55 pm
Location: Tijeras, NM

#39 Postby alicia-w » Mon Nov 08, 2004 1:06 pm

Why would a lawyer be ineligible for jury duty? The only reason I would think so was if he knew the judge, knew the prosecutors, etc. Not all lawyers are trial lawyers...

Here's a link to the Modesto Bee, where the person be talked about here is Alternate #1:

http://www.modbee.com/reports/peterson/ ... 5067c.html
0 likes   

Brent
S2K Supporter
S2K Supporter
Posts: 38118
Age: 37
Joined: Sun May 16, 2004 10:30 pm
Location: Tulsa Oklahoma
Contact:

#40 Postby Brent » Mon Nov 08, 2004 2:32 pm

FOX News is reporting right now that the jury may not be able to reach a verdict.
0 likes   
#neversummer


Return to “Off Topic”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 41 guests