GUILTY CA - Laci Peterson, 27, pregnant, Modesto, 24 Dec 2002

[Weki]

I didn’t realize it was Nice that had filled out the form “No” when asked if she could put whatever she’s heard about the case aside and only judge based on evidence presented in court. I thought (for some reason) they were talking about another juror. The defense explanation for why they thought Geragos didn’t strike her for that was that they PROBABLY ASSUMED SHE MADE A MISTAKE! What!? So they agree with the prosecutor that Nice just made a lot of “mistakes” when filling out forms?

Even if you thought she didn’t mean to check ‘No’ you have to follow up! Smh.

Vinnie on CourtTV is arguing defense desperately wanted Nice! They knew she was the type to create problems and they were right! Cause here we are!

 

[ilovewings]

I didn’t realize it was Nice that had filled out the form “No” when asked if she could put whatever she’s heard about the case aside and only judge based on evidence presented in court. I thought (for some reason) they were talking about another juror. The defense explanation for why they thought Geragos didn’t strike her for that was that they PROBABLY ASSUMED SHE MADE A MISTAKE! What!? So they agree with the prosecutor that Nice just made a lot of “mistakes” when filling out forms?

Even if you thought she didn’t mean to check ‘No’ you have to follow up! Smh.

Vinnie on CourtTV is arguing defense desperately wanted Nice! They knew she was the type to create problems and they were right! Cause here we are!

So let me get this straight: she answers truthfully and the defense keeps her on the jury?
okay then, but now they want to use her as a reason to get the verdict overturned. Hope that does not happen

 

[Seeker2022]

Why didnt the defense call those witnesses that could allegedly
helped his case?????

I do not know why they were not allowed but that is what happens in a lot of cases here. This is another reason for their claims of judicial misconduct.

 

[Seeker2022]

No

No, the media didn't convict Scott, and the reports of Laci were false sightings. I also live in the Bay Area. There was so MUCH evidence.

Reality sucks. The media had him guilty in their articles. Again just like they (same paper) did to George Souliotes. He was innocent but read those articles and oh ya, it was him, he was guilty. Laceys neighbors did not lie about seeing her.

 

[ilovewings]

I do not know why they were not allowed but that is what happens in a lot of cases here. This is another reason for their claims of judicial misconduct.

I'm sorry but I cannot believe if the defense had witnesses to he!p their case, that
they would not be allowed to testify, especially in a death pena!ty case---that just
does not make sense, and further if that were true, that would have been brought
out in an appeal.

 

[Seeker2022]

I'm sorry but I cannot believe if the defense had witnesses to he!p their case, that
they would not be allowed to testify, especially in a death pena!ty case---that just
does not make sense, and further if that were true, that would have been brought
out in an appeal.

<modsnip> Janey seems to have the most information listed on many sites.

 

[ilovewings]

<modsnip> Janey seems to have the most information listed on many sites.

Ya think maybe his sister in law might be a tad biased? I won't be reading any info from her- I will reiterate there would be no reason a judge would not allow the defense to put on their witnesses that could help their case-- they did not produce such witnesses. Now they say all kinds of things like Laci was kidnapped and killed by someone(s) and dumped where Scott would be framed: For me , that defies logic. If the defense really believed that, they could have and should have found those people and put them on the stand: that was not done.

 

[MsBetsy]

Ya think maybe his sister in law might be a tad biased? I won't be reading any info from her- I will reiterate there would be no reason a judge would not allow the defense to put on their witnesses that could help their case-- they did not produce such witnesses. Now they say all kinds of things like Laci was kidnapped and killed by someone(s) and dumped where Scott would be framed: For me , that defies logic. If the defense really believed that, they could have and should have found those people and put them on the stand: that was not done.

I think that may have been the problem. Didn't the defense claim to have witnesses, yet never called them to testify? It's been a long time since the trial, but if I remember correctly, they promised they would prove someone else was responsible, yet it seemed like they didn't even try.

 

[Weki]

So let me get this straight: she answers truthfully and the defense keeps her on the jury?
okay then, but now they want to use her as a reason to get the verdict overturned. Hope that does not happen

I'm wondering if the fact that the judge also overlooked that 'No' response and didn't automatically strike her gives the defense a pass on that issue. In other words, I don't know if the judge can rule 'well you didn't strike her even though she told you she was biased in her answer to the questionnaire so now you don't get a new trial claiming that she was biased.' Because I think the trial court also erred in not striking her outright for that 'No' response. Ugh.

 

[ilovewings]

I'm wondering if the fact that the judge also overlooked that 'No' response and didn't automatically strike her gives the defense a pass on that issue. In other words, I don't know if the judge can rule 'well you didn't strike her even though she told you she was biased in her answer to the questionnaire so now you don't get a new trial claiming that she was biased.' Because I think the trial court also erred in not striking her outright for that 'No' response. Ugh.

Lord, I hope that is not the case.

 

[ilovewings]

I think that may have been the problem. Didn't the defense claim to have witnesses, yet never called them to testify? It's been a long time since the trial, but if I remember correctly, they promised they would prove someone else was responsible, yet it seemed like they didn't even try.

That was my point in my above referenced post. The defense could surely have found witnesses to assist their defense and they apparently chose not to do so- sure they said someone else was responsible (some other dude did it), but they did not call one witness to substantiate that defense. Further, if they had any witnesses that were not allowed to be called, they would have put that in their appeal. Their only appeal involves the juror-

 

[MsBetsy]

That was my point in my above referenced post. The defense could surely have found witnesses to assist their defense and they apparently chose not to do so- sure they said someone else was responsible (some other dude did it), but they did not call one witness to substantiate that defense. Further, if they had any witnesses that were not allowed to be called, they would have put that in their appeal. Their only appeal involves the juror-

Oh, I thought part of the appeal was ineffective counsel. They do seem mainly focused on the juror misconduct, though.

I always assumed his attorney didn't call any witnesses because he couldn't find any to support his claims.

 

[LinasK]

Reality sucks. The media had him guilty in their articles. Again just like they (same paper) did to George Souliotes. He was innocent but read those articles and oh ya, it was him, he was guilty. Laceys neighbors did not lie about seeing her.

Laci was already dead by that point, so even if they think that they didn't lie, it wasn't Laci that they spotted.

 

[BeachSky]

Ya think maybe his sister in law might be a tad biased? I won't be reading any info from her- I will reiterate there would be no reason a judge would not allow the defense to put on their witnesses that could help their case-- they did not produce such witnesses. Now they say all kinds of things like Laci was kidnapped and killed by someone(s) and dumped where Scott would be framed: For me , that defies logic. If the defense really believed that, they could have and should have found those people and put them on the stand: that was not done.

I don’t think I can take that SIL’s circular talk
for another year. Ack!

 

[Kapua]

No

No, the media didn't convict Scott, and the reports of Laci were false sightings. I also live in the Bay Area. There was so MUCH evidence.

Former Bay Area native here, now on the Central Coast. This was the very first case I followed, and you are spot on. There was a mountain of evidence pointing to Scott's guilt. If anything, he was convicted in spite of the media coverage, not because of it. IMHO.

 

[Speculaytor]

Followed this case everyday. Live in the area and was close to an attorney who, for a brief second, looked like he might get involved in the case. It scares me to death that a new generation, after years or decades from a case, might not see it clearly and let people go free who should not. Peterson and Avery, without any doubt in my mind, are clearly guilty, yet they garnered a following, sympathy. Yikes. I don't believe in the death penalty, but life without parole certainly.

 

[Smelly Squirrel]

I know this is probably an unpopular opinion but is there anyone else, like myself, that believes there is a strong possibility that Peterson is innocent? This is a case I continue to keep a close eye on and one that for whatever reason has always gripped my attention. It is my personal belief that he is, in fact, innocent. I would love to hear other people's opinions on this!!

Who did it then? Is it the same killer that OJ is looking for?

 

[BeachSky]

Former Bay Area native here, now on the Central Coast. This was the very first case I followed, and you are spot on. There was a mountain of evidence pointing to Scott's guilt. If anything, he was convicted in spite of the media coverage, not because of it. IMHO.

Exactly. The boat evidence alone. The remaining cement circles in his storage unit where he made the anchors that decapitated her. I believed the witnesses that said he was rude/irate/ pulling that boat trailer. Traveling to dump her body. Of course he had her in there under the tarp FGS. And that’s just the beginning evidence.
God be with Sharon Rocha if she has to go through this horror again. It’s like Scott killing Laci & Connor twice IMO.

 

[Niner]

Any news yet on Judge's decision - a date maybe?

 

[casesensitive]

That was my point in my above referenced post. The defense could surely have found witnesses to assist their defense and they apparently chose not to do so- sure they said someone else was responsible (some other dude did it), but they did not call one witness to substantiate that defense. Further, if they had any witnesses that were not allowed to be called, they would have put that in their appeal. Their only appeal involves the juror-

I saw Mark Geragos in a TV video as he walking in public, years after the trial, being asked by a news reporter why he didn't call the witnesses to trial who said they saw Laci walking her dog that morning. He said, and I paraphrase, that he couldn't call them because their witness statements varied and he thought this would benefit the prosecutors more than the defense. I have tried to find this video but haven't been successful. Based on this, it was his decision to not call witnesses who thought they saw Laci and her dog that morning.