I'd be pointing fingers at that burglary across the street also. Almost no one even knows about it.
Convicted Murderer Scott Peterson's case taken by Project Innocence
- Thread starter WhatInThe
- Start date
VintageBetter
Senior Member
I don't care how much these killers spent on their defense. There are murderers walking around free (but Blake and Spector finally died, Spector in prison). This is a California Tradition, BTW. Here - you can look up your state's murder Cold Cases: Cold Case Homicide Stats - Project: Cold Case
Why is it so horrid to you that I criticize CA? To me, the state gets a "D" grade on solving murders. What grade do you give it?
And why, in the name of all things holy, should I or any other taxpayers keep our mouths shut about this high number of cold cases? Any other Constitutional Rights you'd like to take away from anyone today?
Nathan
SF VIP
- Location
- High Desert- Calif.
How about you list your city & state, I'm quite sure there will be ample material to criticize.
@VintageBetter , this is pretty over-the-top, I think your attitude speaks volumes...
Last edited:
Conversely, Pennsylvania spends a lot less. My point is, it’s not how much we spend on corrections and convictions, but how many do we get right based on only the evidence? Too often verdicts are based on opinions and not facts or evidence.
Nathan
SF VIP
- Location
- High Desert- Calif.
Pennsylvania would spend less, not nearly being the high profile "magnet" for litigation that California is.
The U.S. has about 1% of it's population behind bars, that's around 3 million inmates. Estimates vary, of those incarcerated about 3 to 10% are innocent. Anyway, as you say- verdicts are[often] based on opinions and not facts or evidence, which is a sad situation in judicial process.
The Innocence Project relies heavily on DNA evidence, more so than witness testimony. It will be interesting to see the "new" evidence in the Peterson case.
Raddragn
Member
- Location
- Washington State
Unfortunately, our justice system is composed of human beings. Humans have vulnerabilities to race, gender, age and previous behavior. I'm betting his infidelity biased some jurors against him before the trial even began. Investigators pick which clues they follow up on and prosecutors determine which information they will make public to the court and the defense. There have been many innocents who have been wrongfully convicted and many have even been given a death penalty. Being convicted doesn't necessarily mean you ARE guilty; it means a group of people THINK you are guilty.
Wes
Member
- Location
- southern california
I've been on a jury before, and hated to have to make a decision that effected a person's whole life. I so wish there were a way to decipher what is perfect justice.
VintageBetter
Senior Member
With all due respect, that is simply not true. In civil cases plaintiffs have to demonstrate that a preponderance of the evidence proves they are right. In criminal cases the standard is much higher. Those have to be proven "beyond a shadow of a doubt". E.g., the O.J. jury was pursuaded by the defense lawyers that the LAPD had planted evidence, therefore the DNA proof that the Prosecution had was not enough for them. HOW would LAPD officers have gotten Nicole Brown's blood spattered inside of O.J.'s car?
VintageBetter
Senior Member
The judge never gets to ask the jury how they made that leap in logic. That jury didn't give DNA evidence much weight or creedance. Perhaps they tought it was all made up? Or they TOLD THEMSELVES it was all made-up evidence by the LAPD.
How do they explain to themselves that after all these years no other suspects have been found who might have killed Nicole and Ron Goldman that night? IDK what stories they tell themselves. LAPD has never had any other suspects and yes, they did look for other possibilities.
The national Innocence Project has done some great work. One estimate is that 4% are wrongly convicted. That is terrible. But that means the system got 96% right.
https://www.science.org/content/article/more-4-death-row-inmates-may-be-innocent
VintageBetter
Senior Member
Nathan, we are strangers and I don't know why my outspokeness bothers you so. But I survived a marriage, only one, in which my ex-husband was always shutting me down whenever I wanted to talk.
You can keep telling me to shut up and telling me I'm over-the-top, but I'm simply never going to shut-up for a man again for the rest of my life, unless he's holding a gun on me, or a knife to my neck and tells me to shut up or he's going to kill me. (I suppose that's over-the-top too? Sorry - I have been watching "I Survived", a really great show, IMO. That show has shown me it's very common when a man or woman is threatened she/he just goes along with whatever the perp tells them to do.)
We were both raised in an era where women generally went along with whatever the men in their lives told them to do. I am so glad that era is over. If you don't like my words, you can always block me.
Nathan
SF VIP
- Location
- High Desert- Calif.
Where on Earth did you come up with that??? I invited you to share the location of your home turf, so that I could critique it as you have done with mine. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.
Nathan, we had a murder trial that I appeared in only as a witness because I gathered some evidence. When the verdict of guilty came down, the judge asked the jury, “Say you one, say you all?” One lone juror said, “No.”
The judge asked the juror if she didn’t agree in the jury room and she said yes. The judge then said “But now you say no?” She said she changed her mind. The judge declared a mistrial. The trial lasted 9 days. There was no second trial. She accepted a plea deal of Voluntary Manslaughter and received a sentence of (I believe) 20 years with 5 years suspended, but she must serve all 15 years.
In the Peterson case, it will be interesting to see what the IP will use as a means of evidence that will get him off. Do you think the trial will get moved?
OneEyedDiva
SF VIP
- Location
- New Jersey
Dan Abrams, Chief Legal Analyst for ABC said that Project Innocence seems to be overlooking the concrete evidence that Peterson did kill his wife, which the jury must've found compelling enough to find him guilty. He gave a few examples, which I don't remember right now.
@911 Dan said he highly doubts that this new development will warrant a second trial and that even if it did, it would take a long time for that to happen.
@911 Dan said he highly doubts that this new development will warrant a second trial and that even if it did, it would take a long time for that to happen.
Last edited:
His defense at the time and now is it was a circumstantial case. They admitted he cheated on his wife but that doesn't make him a murderer.
Here Was Scott Peterson's Defense at His 2004 Murder Trial in Death of Pregnant Wife Laci
It is compelling evidence. The biggest piece of physical evidence I think was they found a hair from his wife on his boat which is under question
StarSong
Awkward is my Superpower
- Location
- Los Angeles Suburbs
Just for clarification, this sister-in-law is related to him because of marriage to Scott Peterson's brother, she isn't Laci's sister.
Nathan
SF VIP
- Location
- High Desert- Calif.
Right now there's nothing in the media coverage that I've read to indicate such a move. I can't see how changing the venue from San Mateo would benefit the defense, like the Susan Smith case, everyone in the world with electronic media access has heard of the case, and formed an opinion.
Nathan
SF VIP
- Location
- High Desert- Calif.
@StarSong , interesting comment from Janey Peterson...
If in fact Scott Peterson is actually innocent then he is just the world's unluckiest adulterer, as the appearances and timeline couldn't be more damning.
OneEyedDiva
SF VIP
- Location
- New Jersey
One of the things Dan Abrams did bring up is that Scott's GF said first of all, she didn't know he was married when they got together and that (once she did, I guess) he told her that "Lacy is gone". Now some might take that to mean she left him, but apparently the jury didn't.
Mrs. Robinson
Well-known Member
- Location
- Nampa,Idaho
According to my husband`s friend,who served on the jury,he was convicted on the evidence....
Can you tell us what that evidence was Mrs. R.? Other than a strand of Laci's hair found on the boat, I remember no physical evidence from this case.
StarSong
Awkward is my Superpower
- Location
- Los Angeles Suburbs
Totally agree.
There are exceptions to that though.
Last edited:
StarSong
Awkward is my Superpower
- Location
- Los Angeles Suburbs
You're right. Most states charge for misdemeanors for thefts over $950. Only 9 US states have lower thresholds for felony theft.
2024 Theft Amounts for Felony by State - 2024
NJ - $200
NM & IL - $500
FL, HI, IN, MO & WA - $750
VT - $750
CA -$950
21 are at $1000
2 are $1200
10 at $1500
4 at $2000
2 at $2500
Felony Theft Amount by State 2024
VintageBetter
Senior Member
It is not safe for people to share with the entire Internet world, including scammers in far-off nations, their location. I love letting bumper-sticker philosiphies rule people's lives, don't you? "If it doesn't fit you must acquit!" Jonnie Cochran told the jury that in the O.J, trial and it worked. They ignored all evidence and went with his bumper-sticker poem.
I see life, and legal decisions, as a bit more complex than bumper stickers. "What's good for the goose is good for the gander." Let's make all those ganders lay eggs. Likewise, every man needs to get a uterus implanted and get pregnant right now.
If it were a choice for the man or woman to carry a baby for 9 months and gain 40 lbs. along with it, I'd be much happier to have children that way. "Ill carry one baby and you carry the next one, dearheart."
See the weakness in your slogan? We can't even make ganders lay eggs let alone make men carry pregancies. Likewise, Cochran's poem said the jury could throw out all evidence INCLUDING MOTIVE and his HISTORY of beating the crap out of Nicole, out and just worry about how the gloves didn't fit. But lots of people know many types of leather SHRINKS when it gets wet. Those gloves had gotten wet. They were not the same as when he wore them before the killing. He also tried them on over rubber gloves. Those caused a lot of friction.
E.g.: I have Isotoner driving gloves. If I put on my vinyl gloves I use for changing my light bulbs on my car, THEN try to pull-on my tight Isotoners over those vinyl gloves, it's going to take a LOT of extra pulling. And my Isotoners are not made of shuken leather. They are Spandex, super-stretchy. I didn't see a lot of effort from O.J. when it came to pulling those gloves on. He was like a little kid, doing a bad job in his homelework and telling his teacher, "There. I wrote 15 words" (7 of which are 'and').
So, go ahead. Make those ganders lay eggs and tell the world where you live if you want to.
VintageBetter
Senior Member
My argument to that is, "So if your friends are jumping off a cliff you will too?"
The other differnce between CA and many other states, not all, but many, is that CA has a lot more gang members than other states. Hundreds of thousands more. surv_8.html Gang Populations in Los Angeles County, California Report 2015-130
E.g. is Vermont a gang-infested place? It's not known for that. Illinois is. Hawaii? Jersey probably has a lot of them and look, they have kept their felony level quite low.
Again I ask, if your friends are jumping off of a cliff, does that mean you should too?