home

New Evidence in Scott Peterson Case

By TChris, Section Crime in the News
Posted on Sat Feb 26, 2005 at 09:49:58 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

by TChris

Will Scott Peterson be given a second chance to convince a jury that he didn't murder his wife? His defense team, headed by Mark Geragos, may have uncovered new evidence of Peterson's innocence.

Michael Cardoza, a local lawyer who has been helping the defense, said ... a prison inmate had been caught on tape talking to his brother about a burglary at the Petersons' house in which Laci Peterson confronted the robbers. Geragos may argue that authorities withheld evidence that could have been helpful in proving that Scott Peterson was not the killer.

Peterson's sentencing has been postponed to give both parties more time to prepare.

< Fishing for Abortion Records in Kansas | RIP: Peter Benenson >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    New Evidence in Scott Peterson Case | 17 comments (17 topical)
    Re: New Evidence in Scott Peterson Case (none / 0) (#1)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Feb 26, 2005 at 10:11:21 AM EST
    Sure, and I bet the brother only had one arm. I am LOL.

    Re: New Evidence in Scott Peterson Case (none / 0) (#2)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Feb 26, 2005 at 11:41:40 AM EST
    the jurors had dinner with laci's family and the prosecutors? wow, how often does this occur? this whole case stank from day one, and the smell of three day old fish just gets worse. though it may not be evidence of conflict of interest, that a prosecutor would have a clearly personal relationship with both the victim's family, and the jurors, certainly causes me to question the impartiality of the whole process. wherever do they get these people from?

    Re: New Evidence in Scott Peterson Case (none / 0) (#3)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Feb 26, 2005 at 12:34:43 PM EST
    Speaking of the one-armed man. Sheppard may have been innocent. He spent ten years in lockup for possibly murdering his wife.

    Re: New Evidence in Scott Peterson Case (none / 0) (#4)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Feb 26, 2005 at 03:47:56 PM EST
    I think celebrity and infotainment trials and investigations like Peterson, MJ, and Ramsey are destructive to our CJ system. Peterson was convicted on circumstancial evidence and I think the conviction was largely driven by media coverage. Our system is designed to let a certain number of guilty people walk in order to prevent the incarceration of an innocent person. I don't know if Peterson killed his wife or not, but I think he was in the group mentioned above that should have walked away from the trial. Circumstancial evidence makes me uncomfortable. I like forensic or physical evidence to support a serious crime like murder. It's ironic that Jim mentions the one armed man. Try my link above and read down to the bottom. Sheppard's son insisted on dna analysis of the Sheppard evidence and the dna analysis indicates a third person was in the home and bleeding at the time that Marilyn Sheppard died. Mr. Sheppard did ten years in the slammer before freed on second trial. The dna did indicate one arm or two. I am betting two.

    Re: New Evidence in Scott Peterson Case (none / 0) (#5)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Feb 26, 2005 at 05:30:09 PM EST
    Talk about grasping at straws!!! Mr Peterson is going to San Quentin where he'll be treated to a life altering lethal injection in 25 years or so. I'll wait!

    Re: New Evidence in Scott Peterson Case (none / 0) (#7)
    by cp on Sat Feb 26, 2005 at 07:32:27 PM EST
    maize, i'm curious, which of the multiple, discredited, "theories" of the crime did you buy into? what physical evidence linking mr. peterson to the "murders" convinced you of his guilt, since there wasn't any physical evidence linking him to the disappearence? scott peterson certainly came off as a cad, with a questionable choice of lady friends. were that enough to convict, the nation simply hasn't enough jail cells. i have no clue if he is responsible for the disappearence and death of his wife, but the prosecution certainly presented no compelling evidence to surmount reasonable doubt. in fact, they couldn't even prove the woman was, indeed, murdered. as ca noted, this was a media driven conviction, it had little or nothing to do with the actual facts of the case. read the comments by the jurors, subsequent to the trial. you don't want these people holding your life in their hands, in any setting.

    Re: New Evidence in Scott Peterson Case (none / 0) (#8)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Feb 27, 2005 at 06:23:56 AM EST
    CA - Actually I was thinking of the long running TV series, and from what little I remember from the Sheppard`case, I could not have convicted him. I'm just suspicious of jail house information, and would be the world's worst/best juror based on such information. It is tainted at best by the character of the person giving it, and, at worst, is made up to help the informant. If you read the link, it doesn't say how it was obatined, or who said it. "He said a prison inmate had been caught on tape talking to his brother about a burglary at the Petersons' house in which Laci Peterson confronted the robbers." Obviously, the inmate is repeating what he has overheard, or what he has been told. That looks like hearsay, at best. Plus, I just don't see burglars, after killing someone who has confronted them, leaving with the body, cutting off the head, etc. I see them leaving as rapidly as possible.

    Re: New Evidence in Scott Peterson Case (none / 0) (#9)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Feb 27, 2005 at 07:03:34 AM EST
    The fugitive series has its roots in the Sheppard case. And the series was instrumental in getting Sheppard the second trial that led to his release. I understand and agree with what you are saying about jailhouse evidence. My basic problem with Peterson is that I don't believe the prosecution met its burden of proof and the jury was heavily influenced by the media coverage. I didn't follow the trial very closely. I don't think the jurors were sequestered, right? Geragos may have missed the boat if he didn't insist on sequestration once the media signed on bigtime. I am also not sure how well sequestration can work in these days of ipods and pdas. Again leads to my conclusion that infotainment and celebrity trial works against just findings. That hurts us all, not just cads like Peterson.

    Re: New Evidence in Scott Peterson Case (none / 0) (#10)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Feb 27, 2005 at 10:00:43 AM EST
    I agree with conscious angel's post. I am shocked & dismayed at how the legal system has now became entertainment. The cases are no longer about the victims and justice but more about the celebrity attorneys and legal analysts, whose sound bite is better, etc. I am equally disgusted to find that law schools are now offering courses on dealing with the "big cases and the media" - I guess the lure of the camera is too hard to resist even for educational institutions.

    Re: New Evidence in Scott Peterson Case (none / 0) (#11)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 09:01:49 AM EST
    It's sort of taking a turn like the Simpson case. How in the simpson case had proved him not guilty then later having a civil case that proved him guilty, and all they had him do was pay $8.5 million in compensation. and they are threatening Peterson with capital punishment??

    Re: New Evidence in Scott Peterson Case (none / 0) (#12)
    by Whitney on Tue Mar 08, 2005 at 07:23:56 PM EST
    i think scott peterson is innocent. whenever this whole thing started of course i felt sorry for the rochas because i know what it feels like to lose someone that you love very deeply. but i think the medesto police department is a poor example of people in uniform.they needed someone to pin it on and who better then the husband!

    Re: New Evidence in Scott Peterson Case (none / 0) (#13)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Mar 08, 2005 at 09:33:41 PM EST
    Who in the world would take a pregnant woman from her home in Modesto, to the SF bay and dump her body there... Gee, lets see. who was fishing in that same bay...? Think people..

    Re: New Evidence in Scott Peterson Case (none / 0) (#14)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 09, 2005 at 10:40:04 AM EST
    Petersen with an e made alot of sense "common sense". thats what seems to be lacking here. the fact that scott was calling amber during search for laci makes no common sense.face it he was spending as litle time as possible with her even a seperate xmas party did you see that smirk.while he was out winining and dining as well as buying a boat, she was pawning grandmothers jewelry for xmas cash he did not care about her.

    Re: New Evidence in Scott Peterson Case (none / 0) (#15)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 09, 2005 at 10:45:26 AM EST
    Scott caught Liaria (lying) from his Mother Jackie.

    Re: New Evidence in Scott Peterson Case (none / 0) (#16)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 09, 2005 at 11:07:58 AM EST
    Pretend examples of evidence Scott murdered Lacy: Direct evidence: a witness testifies he saw Scott Peterson stabbing Lacy. Circumstantial evidence: a witness testifies he heard Lacy scream and then saw Scott Peterson run out of the house with blood on his hands seconds before Lacy was found alone inside stabbed to death. Circumstantial evidence can be just as strong as direct evidence.

    Re: New Evidence in Scott Peterson Case (none / 0) (#17)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 09, 2005 at 04:03:45 PM EST
    Scott is guilty, and I dont know what they are waiting about his dirty case.He deserve to die but not with injection only like his wife and inocent unborn angel.

    Re: New Evidence in Scott Peterson Case (none / 0) (#18)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 10, 2005 at 01:31:58 PM EST
    By Joe "Scott caught Liaria (lying) from his Mother Jackie." I couldn't agree more. I strongly believe he is guilty and he deserves whatever punishment will wipe the smirk off his face. I serious think he thought he was going to get away with it because he did a good job of cleaning up the evidence.

    New Evidence in Scott Peterson Case | 17 comments (17 topical)