First, the prosecution gives an overly long, passionless opening practically conceding that their case is woefully short on direct evidence linking Scott Peterson to the murder of his pregnant wife Laci. As one former prosecutor said:

Legal analyst and attorney Dean Johnson is following the Peterson case, and told NBC 4 Tuesday, "My assessment of the opening statements thus far is that Rick Distaso, who is leading the prosecution team, is really losing this jury. Thus far, he has had a long, rambling statement … he hasn't covered the key points that the prosecution needs to cover to convince this jury about their case."

Thursday, the first full day of testimony, didn't go much better for the prosecution:

Prosecutors trying Scott Peterson's murder case got off to a rocky start Thursday, with some of their first witnesses seeming to do more harm to prosecutors than good....The prosecution "is helping the defense," said Michael Cardoza, a former Alameda County, Calif., prosecutor following the case. "They started on the starting line and are 10 yards behind already. They're running the wrong way."..."How is this a prosecution case?" asked Jim Hammer, a former San Francisco district attorney. "These are more like defense witnesses."

No murder weapon. No cause of death. No eyewitnesses to Laci's killing. Exceedingly well-prepared defense lawyers. Reasonable doubt galore. That's the wrap-up for week one of this trial that is supposed to last six months.

Update: Check out ScottIsInnocent.com put together by a Sunnyvale grandmother. Among the features: