Deliberations are underway in the trial of Scott Peterson. What verdict do you think the jury will return?


Deliberations Resume in Peterson Trial
By BRIAN SKOLOFF, AP

REDWOOD CITY, Calif. (AP) - Jurors in the Scott Peterson trial began deliberating whether the former fertilizer salesman killed his pregnant wife, weighing the prosecution's largely circumstantial case against the defense's theory of a possible frame-up.

The jurors, who sat through nearly five months of testimony, met for more than four hours Wednesday before retiring for the day. They resumed deliberations Thursday morning.

Judge Alfred A. Delucchi sent the panelists into the jury room after about 45 minutes of instructions. Delucchi plans to keep the jury sequestered until it reaches a verdict.

Prosecutors claim Peterson strangled or smothered his wife, Laci, on Dec. 23 or 24, 2002, then dumped her weighted body into San Francisco Bay. Her badly decomposed remains and those of the fetus were discovered four months later, not far from where Peterson claims to have been fishing alone the day she vanished.

Defense lawyers claim someone else abducted and killed the Modesto woman, then placed the bodies in the water.

The jury as has two choices should it decide to convict - first-degree murder, carrying a possible death sentence or life without parole, and second-degree murder, carrying two sentences of 15 years to life.

"First-degree murder you need two things, expressed malice and intent to kill and premeditation," Delucchi told jurors. "Then you also have second-degree murder," a lesser charge the judge added after finding there was ample evidence to support a case that did not involve prior planning.

The trial began with jury selection in March, and opening statements were in June.

Prosecutors argued in their final remarks to jurors Wednesday that it is "ridiculous" to think someone would frame the former fertilizer salesman by hiding the bodies in the bay, hoping they would one day be discovered, as defense lawyers suggested.

"You can't base a reasonable doubt on an unreasonable interpretation of the evidence," prosecutor Rick Distaso said in his rebuttal to the defense closing argument. "It's just not reasonable that anyone put that body in the bay to frame him. If it's not reasonable, you must reject it."

Defense lawyer Mark Geragos has conceded all along that Peterson, who was having an affair at the time Laci vanished, is a liar and a cheat. But he said he shouldn't be convicted of murder.

"You're not supposed to just decide this case on whether or not you like Scott Peterson," Geragos told jurors.

In their closing arguments, prosecutors made their case for premeditation, contending each bit of evidence is like a piece of a puzzle that when put together points to murder. Geragos countered that with so many missing pieces, such as the lack of a murder weapon, cause or time of death and real motive, jurors must decide there is too much reasonable doubt to convict.

I am hoping it's guilty, sorry I don't buy that someone else killed her. :mad:

Originally posted by Angela Micelli
I am hoping it's guilty, sorry I don't buy that someone else killed her. :mad:

I agree! I really hope they convict him soon.

I've been on verdict watch with Court TV. I was hoping they would come back with a verdict before the weekend. :(

Well if Scott is acquitted, I hope he makes it his misson in life to track down the satan worshipping homeless cult guys responsible for Laci's death...

You're going down, Scotty...

;)

Originally posted by TJL
Well if Scott is acquitted, I hope he makes it his misson in life to track down the satan worshipping homeless cult guys responsible for Laci's death...
Maybe he can team up with O.J. Simpson to find the "real killers".

I think he is guilty, but will be found not guilty.

After this past week I'm not betting on anything for sure!:lol: :wave:

Originally posted by Janice
Maybe he can team up with O.J. Simpson to find the "real killers".

I'll start writing the pilot episode for CBS. We'll split the profits...

;)

Originally posted by Angela Micelli
I am hoping it's guilty, sorry I don't buy that someone else killed her. :mad: :yeahthat :nod:

I think he'll get guilty, though. And if he doesn't..than the jury has issues.

I've been watching it from the beginning and I'm very nervous and very anxious. I started getting the jitters today.

GUILTY! :grr:

When he's convicted I have a new Avatar made up and ready to go LOL

Originally posted by MandieR1980
When he's convicted I have a new Avatar made up and ready to go LOL

whats it look like?:lol:

Originally posted by Avril's Sk8er Boi
whats it look like?:lol:

it's a different pic of him and it says "Bubba's new bitch!"

Originally posted by MandieR1980
it's a different pic of him and it says "Bubba's new bitch!"


:rofl:

Originally posted by MandieR1980
it's a different pic of him and it says "Bubba's new bitch!"

:rofl: Can't wait to see it ;)

Originally posted by Angela Micelli
:rofl: Can't wait to see it ;)

it's not that big of a deal actually it's like this one I just take a pic and put writing on it with a program that came with my printer. I have no artist talent at all LOL

Mandie, just a personal question.

I notice you are very sensitive and passionate about the Peterson case. I was wondering, did you know Laci or something? Since I know a lot of people are following the trial, but you really seem to have a passion about it that nobody else on SO has, especially with animosity towards Scott. I was wondering if you just were fascinated by the case or if you had connections to the Petersons that really made it hit home for you.

Originally posted by BuffySlayer79
Mandie, just a personal question.

I notice you are very sensitive and passionate about the Peterson case. I was wondering, did you know Laci or something? Since I know a lot of people are following the trial, but you really seem to have a passion about it that nobody else on SO has, especially with animosity towards Scott. I was wondering if you just were fascinated by the case or if you had connections to the Petersons that really made it hit home for you.

nope I didn't know them at all. I was following it from the beginning but once I got laid off from my job I had more time to watch the trial and everything. You could say I'm obsessed LOL This is the first trial that I ever got interested in. I didn't pay attention to OJ's mainly because I was in school then.

I don't mean to sound insensitive, so I'll preface this by saying that the murder of anyone is a tragic thing. But I honestly couldn't care less about following this trial.

The media sure like to sensationalize things. And it looks like we're soon gong to have to go through this again now that that ******* Mark Hacking pleaded not guilty.

Well... no verdict today. They will be sequestered over the weekend.

Strongly leaning towards a hung jury based on that. It's rarely good if you want someone to be guilty to have them still deliberating.

Originally posted by Brent88
Well... no verdict today. They will be sequestered over the weekend.

Strongly leaning towards a hung jury based on that. It's rarely good if you want someone to be guilty to have them still deliberating.

that's not true the length of deliberations means nothing they have a buttload of evidence to go over. If you look back at the OJ verdict the jury deliberated for like 3 hours and came back with an acquital. You can't determine Scotts fait by the length of deliberation.

He's so guilty. It is such a shame. I remember watching this case from the very beginning when I was in Germany. Back when they were still looking for her they thought there was a chance she'd been taken out of the country - so I printed up a flyer and hung it up in my town. Poor babies. Laci and Conner did not deserve to die like that. What a horrible person. There's a special ring of Hell for people like him.

Everyone's talking about how he acted guilty, and it's true. He turned down an opportunity to appear on Larry King to go and distribute flyers in southern California. EXCUSE ME! Larry King is on international CNN which is watched worldwide. I could watch it in Germany, England, and France - but he thought it was a better bet to pass out a couple pieces of paper in California? Oh come on.

Did somebody know she'd never left California? :rolleyes:

Originally posted by BuffySlayer79
Mandie, just a personal question.

I notice you are very sensitive and passionate about the Peterson case. I was wondering, did you know Laci or something? Since I know a lot of people are following the trial, but you really seem to have a passion about it that nobody else on SO has, especially with animosity towards Scott. I was wondering if you just were fascinated by the case or if you had connections to the Petersons that really made it hit home for you.

Mandie's not the only one here that pays close attention. It's a really tragic case, and a very interesting one. Scott is guilty, and we all do want to see justice done.

http://www.sitcomsonline.com/boards/showthread.php?s=&threadid=59017&highlight=Laci

Originally posted by webwarrior762004
I do hope that his rights are protected according to the law.

Why do you care? are you a supporter of his? Of course his rights are being protected. Too bad Laci's weren't.

:eek: I can't believe this poll is almost tied, I never would have thought that many people would think he's innocent :eek:

Originally posted by Angela Micelli
:eek: I can't believe this poll is almost tied, I never would have thought that many people would think he's innocent :eek:

Sheesh..all the voters must be from Ohio or something...:eek:

;)

Hmm, I think we can tell what's going through his mind right now..

http://www.courttv.com/graphics/photos/trials/laci-peterson/inside/lede/peterson-scott-inside-110204pm.jpg

Originally posted by Dutabi84
Sheesh..all the voters must be from Ohio or something...:eek:

;)

:lol:

:p

Originally posted by Dutabi84
Hmm, I think we can tell what's going through his mind right now..

http://www.courttv.com/graphics/photos/trials/laci-peterson/inside/lede/peterson-scott-inside-110204pm.jpg

Looks like he's trying to figure out how to do an "OJ" ;)

Originally posted by Angela Micelli
:eek: I can't believe this poll is almost tied, I never would have thought that many people would think he's innocent :eek:

I think posters are just voting for the heck of it look at the amount of people who are voting and the amount who are actually talking about it. I'm glad nobody here is on that jury that's for sure!

Originally posted by Dutabi84
Sheesh..all the voters must be from Ohio or something...:eek:

;)

:rotflmao:

I think this is going to be a repeat of O.J. folks. Remember... most people thought he was guilty as sin as well and it came back not guilty.

Originally posted by Brent88
:rotflmao:

I think this is going to be a repeat of O.J. folks. Remember... most people thought he was guilty as sin as well and it came back not guilty.

That's what I'm thinking. God I hope not :mad:

Originally posted by Brent88
:rotflmao:

I think this is going to be a repeat of O.J. folks. Remember... most people thought he was guilty as sin as well and it came back not guilty.

SHHHHH don't jinx it!

Originally posted by Angela Micelli
Looks like he's trying to figure out how to do an "OJ" ;)

Well, actually I was thinking something more along the lines of.."Wow..that egg salad isn't sitting well."

But yeah, I guess you could be right. ;)

Originally posted by Dutabi84
Well, actually I was thinking something more along the lines of.."Wow..that egg salad isn't sitting well."

But yeah, I guess you could be right. ;)

or "I wonder if they'd notice if I picked my nose"

Originally posted by Angela Micelli
Looks like he's trying to figure out how to do an "OJ" ;)

:bouncers

Originally posted by Angela Micelli
:eek: I can't believe this poll is almost tied, I never would have thought that many people would think he's innocent :eek:

The poll isn't whether or not you think he's guilty, it's what you think the verdict will be. Just because we all think he's guilty doesn't mean he'll get convicted.

Originally posted by Brent88
I think this is going to be a repeat of O.J. folks. Remember... most people thought he was guilty as sin as well and it came back not guilty.
Tell us O.J., how many victims?

I remember seeing a video of OJ signing an autograph and the woman said to him that she had never met a murderer before. He just smiled it didn't even phase him.

I think he's guilty but judging by this poll and what I'm hearing on tv I think its possible he could be found not guilty.

FOX News reporting the jury may be unable to reach a verdict.

Originally posted by Brent88
FOX News reporting the jury may be unable to reach a verdict.

I only trust Court TV and I haven't heard anything like that.

Originally posted by Brent88
FOX News reporting the jury may be unable to reach a verdict.

I think it is official that California has the country's dumbest jurors.

Way to go California.

Now if they could just produce some actors who will tell me how to vote- oh that's right.

:rolleyes:

CA wow, what an example for the world you are.

Originally posted by MandieR1980
I only trust Court TV and I haven't heard anything like that.

Court TV mentioned it. It's true... the judge met with the jurors and told them to keep going at it.

Originally posted by Brent88
Court TV mentioned it. It's true... the judge met with the jurors and told them to keep going at it.

ok I must have missed it last I heard they wanted the judge to reread a jury instruction.

i dont get why its all over the media, people kill eachother every day.

Originally posted by safety pin
i dont get why its all over the media, people kill eachother every day.

It's because she was pregnant and it happened at Xmas plus Court TV covers almost all the trails so it would be on anyways.

MSNBC reporting it now.

Peterson Jurors Indicate Difficulty With Verdict
Monday, November 08, 2004

REDWOOD CITY, Calif. — Jurors deliberating Scott Peterson's (search) fate in his double-murder trial indicated Monday they may be unable to reach a verdict.

Judge Alfred A. Delucchi (search) summoned jurors to the courtroom Monday just an hour and half after they resumed deliberations. They got the case Wednesday afternoon and spent the weekend sequestered in a hotel after deliberating through Friday.

The judge reissued instructions to the jurors on several key points.

"The people and the defendant are entitled to the individual opinion of each juror," the judge said. "Do not hesitate to change your opinion for the purpose of reaching a verdict if you can do so.

"The attitude and conduct of jurors at all times is very important," he added. "It is rarely helpful for a juror at the beginning of deliberations to express an emphatic opinion on the case."

It was not immediately clear what exactly led to the judge's instructions, which took about five minutes.

But the case was still a long way from a hung jury.

Earlier Monday, jurors viewed the boat prosecutors claim Peterson used to dispose of his wife's body, and resumed deliberations.

After the boat viewing, defense lawyer Mark Geragos (search) sought a mistrial, claiming jurors violated the judge's order by doing "a juror experiment" when several of the panelists got inside the boat and rocked it from side to side. The judge quickly denied the motion.

As an alternative to a mistrial, Geragos asked the judge to be allowed to show jurors a videotaped experiment performed by the defense.

Peterson is charged with two counts of murder in the deaths of his wife, Laci, and the fetus she carried. Prosecutors claim Peterson killed Laci around Dec. 24, 2002, then dumped her weighted body from his small aluminum boat into San Francisco Bay. The remains of Laci Peterson (search) and the fetus were discovered a few miles from where Peterson claims to have gone fishing alone the day his wife vanished.

Defense lawyers have argued that it would have been nearly impossible for Peterson to have heaved his wife's 153-pound body over the edge of the boat without tipping.

Geragos did a videotaped experiment apparently showing the boat would have tipped, but Delucchi ruled against allowing him to show the video to jurors during the trial.

"The juror was in there. The juror was standing inside the boat, shifting back and forth," Geragos told the judge.

The judge had instructed jurors before deliberations began not to conduct any experiments.

"I didn't know they were going to jump up and down on the boat," the judge said.

"I don't want a mistrial ... I want to show my demonstration," Geragos replied.

Jurors viewed the boat and its trailer in a parking garage near the courthouse.

The judge said jurors "carefully examined the sides of the boat."

He then ruled against Geragos' motion for a mistrial or to allow jurors to view his experiment.

Given that the boat was not in the water, "they should bear that in mind in their consideration," the judge said. "I think this works both ways. It can work for the prosecution's benefit. It can work for the defense's benefit."

Jurors entered their third full day of deliberations at about 9:10 a.m. Monday. They got the case Wednesday afternoon.

The judge has decided to allow them to deliberate only Monday-Friday. Twenty-one bailiffs have been sworn in to watch over them throughout the process.

Jurors have two choices should they decide to convict Peterson — first- or second-degree. First-degree convictions, carrying the death penalty of life without parole, would mean jurors believe Peterson planned the killings in advance. Second-degree murder convictions don't require a finding of premeditation, and carry sentences of 15-years-to-life for each count.

well I'd rather have a hung jury than them finding him not guilty. It's gonna suck for the families though they want it over with.

You know it's hard to figure this out.

Perhaps some random killer went through all the trouble of killing her and weighing her body down, throwing her in the water and then just went on his way.

That happens all the time.

Originally posted by dlemond
You know it's hard to figure this out.

Perhaps some random killer went through all the trouble of killing her and weighing her body down, throwing her in the water and then just went on his way.

That happens all the time.

Nope they would have had to know EXACTLY where he dumped them for them to show up in the areas that they did. He went to Brooks Island and that wasn't out in the news until a while after she went missing. It's down right impossible that anyone else did it.

Originally posted by MandieR1980
Nope they would have had to know EXACTLY where he dumped them for them to show up in the areas that they did. He went to Brooks Island and that wasn't out in the news until a while after she went missing. It's down right impossible that anyone else did it.

It was sarcasm.

Of course he did it.
Any idiot could figure that out. Apparently in California they are up to their eyeballs in idiots, so they go to the morons, and then even they can't convict anyone.

Why?

Apparantly they don't want to ruffle any feathers or think that one day they will be a movie star because someone saw their dumb ass on television let a killer go free.
Just point out to me the shy juror who doesn't talk to the media.

On the bright side, hey, if you need to kill your wife move to California.

You'll be skipping and whistling a tune in no time.

It's a freaking lock.

Originally posted by dlemond
It was sarcasm.

Of course he did it.
Any idiot could figure that out. Apparently in California they are up to their eyeballs in idiots, so they go to the morons, and then even they can't convict anyone.



Well... Michael Jackson does live out there. :lol:

Please stop the California bashing!

There are idiots and morons in every state of the union, last week proved that. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: ;)

Originally posted by Jrnygrl
Please stop the California bashing!

There are idiots and morons in every state of the union, last week proved that. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: ;)

Hey now... :p

Originally posted by Jrnygrl
Please stop the California bashing!

There are idiots and morons in every state of the union, last week proved that. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: ;)

If the not guilty verdict fits, then wear it.


Oh, and bash Bush all you want in your SUBTLE ways.

You've got 4 more years kiddo.

Originally posted by Jrnygrl
Please stop the California bashing!

There are idiots and morons in every state of the union, last week proved that. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: ;)

yup that's true and that's why he lost the election

Originally posted by webwarrior762004
You know TJ and Janices rule about "no politics".

i'm sure they all do but its not your place to inforce it.

anyway, I'm not buying someone else killed her. Most of the evidence is traced down to him.

Wow, I cant believe Not GUilty is winning this poll! :eek:

Originally posted by dlemond
On the bright side, hey, if you need to kill your wife move to California.

You'll be skipping and whistling a tune in no time.

It's a freaking lock.

Nah, I hate packing.

;)

Come on you guys stop with thinking people in California let people off for killing their wives.

Remember as a juror you are responsible for someones life, and what happens to it. This is a death penalty case remember, you could be voting to take a life.

I have been on a jury, and it is no fun to make such a decision, even if the evidence points to only one conclusion of guilt.

I did send someone to prison, and it was the most horrible feeling I have ever had. After the experience, I couldn't sleep for weeks, thinking how I may have destroyed someones life and did I do the right thing, was there something I missed, that could have set him free.

i can't even believe the death penalty exists. it's just like raping someone as a punishment for being a rapist.

Originally posted by safety pin
i can't even believe the death penalty exists. it's just like raping someone as a punishment for being a rapist.

There was a thread a few months back about death penalty for attempted suicide. Thats really dumb since its just giving the person what they wanted in the first place.

that whole "boat-tipping" theory is a bunch of bunk anyways - he could easily have thrown her over the BACK of the boat without it tipping sideways....

what a scam ohno:

Originally posted by robyrob
that whole "boat-tipping" theory is a bunch of bunk anyways - he could easily have thrown her over the BACK of the boat without it tipping sideways....

what a scam ohno:

I agree. And why would her body just happen to appear in the same area where he just happened to be fishing?

The only thing I can figure, is the jury is trying to solve the case.

It would be real sad if they would let Scott go.

There seems to be a problem in the jury now. It seems one or more perople don't want to deliberate for some reason.

Scott just wanted to be single and free. He didn't want any children. He had Viagra on him when they caught him trying to flee to Mexico.

Originally posted by Pitooey
He had Viagra on him when they caught him trying to flee to Mexico. for THAT reason alone they should be stringing him up :grr:

Originally posted by Pitooey
Scott just wanted to be single and free. He didn't want any children. He had Viagra on him when they caught him trying to flee to Mexico.

:eek: Woah, I hadn't heard that one!

They need to hurry along with the decision already. I don't think it's that difficult.

I'm sooo happy to hear this case is finally over!!! The only part I'm really waiting for is to hear the judge sentence Laci's husband from hell to life in jail. What does everyone think is going to happen?

My roommate is sick of it already, but since the judge is only giving two hours notice once the jury has a verdict, I've been spending a lot of time watching Court TV (they have the best coverage of the trial, in my opinion.) A talk radio station in my city, 770AM, also have been discussing the case quite frequently.

I just can't take another OJ walking the streets...

Kimberly

Court TV just reported there's an issue with the jury and the attorneys are meeting with the judge. They are going to eat lunch now and the media has been kicked out of the court until 1:30pm Pacific(4:30pm Eastern).

SMELLS LIKE MISTRIAL! :eek: :faint: ohno: ohno: :explode: :explode:

Juror Number 7, an Asian woman around 60 years old has been replaced.

Originally posted by Brent88
Juror Number 7, an Asian woman around 60 years old has been replaced.

Did they give a reason why?

Originally posted by Jrnygrl
Did they give a reason why?

No... but reportedly she was the one causing problems.

All of this is speculation. She could be the reason the jury seemed to be hung yesterday.

Maybe by this Friday we'll have a verdict. Remember jury's don't like being sequestered on the weekends.

Originally posted by Pitooey
Maybe by this Friday we'll have a verdict. Remember jury's don't like being sequestered on the weekends.

They were sequestered this past weekend.

They have to start deliberations all over again.

I read that the dismissed woman had done some of her own research on the case, and that is not allowed. Jurors are supposed to only consider evidence that is presented in court.

As far as California jurors are concerned: please stop the generalizations. It's insulting.

Originally posted by Mysty Eyes
They have to start deliberations all over again.

I read that the dismissed woman had done some of her own research on the case, and that is not allowed. Jurors are supposed to only consider evidence that is presented in court.

As far as California jurors are concerned: please stop the generalizations. It's insulting.

Yes... we now have a reason.

I was joking about California BTW. It just SEEMS that way. :crazy:

Originally posted by Mysty Eyes
As far as California jurors are concerned: please stop the generalizations. It's insulting.


:yeahthat :nod: :nod: :cheers: :thanks:

So now we have a juror, who quit her job to be on this case. From what I understand also, she is a fan of the defense attorney.

I see trouble ahead here.:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :eek: ohno: ohno:

The foreman has been dismissed now. Second juror in 2 days. Only 3 alternates left... this is getting ridiclous.

He'll get off.

It's getting to the point where I'm afraid to turn my tv on :rolleyes: