Anyone else surprised the Scott Petersen jury has been out so long?

[Peregrine]

4 hours of deliberations yesterday and all day today. Either they have some holdouts who think he's innocent or they're debating between 1st or 2nd degree murder.

[Masked]

Takes some time to arrange all the book deals and tabloid interviews.

[Franklinnoble]

My guess is there's one or two jurors who want to flat-out acquit him, based on lack of physical evidence. The rest probably want to see him fry.

[CHEMICAL SOLDIER]

Im not interested in this trial at all. I do feel though that it will be a hung jury due to lack of physical evidence. Thats just my opinion though.

[Draft Dodger]

I think it's deciding between first and second degree murder. I really hope this douchebag doesn't walk.

[Dutch]

I'm very interested in justice being served properly. I am not interested in it being served on the 6 o'clock news.

[Bomber]

I have no idea what's going on in this trial. I assumed it ended a while ago. I thought I've been seeing stuff about him on the grocery store tabloids for a long long time, but I guess not.

[cthomer5000]

you guys sat in on the trial right? what could possible be taking so long?!

[Noop]

Maybe they are taking lunch?

[duckman]

He walks.

[DeToxRox]

would anyone really be shocked if he walked?

i certainly wouldn't.

[Cap Ologist]

If the concrete ain't the same, you must clear his name.

[EagleFan]

They have to wait until Friday, that way they don't have to go back to work until next week.

I would be surprised, and very concerned with how some people think, if he were to be let walk. This man needs to be fried.

[Mr. Wednesday]

Have you seen the trial?

[Glengoyne]

...
I would be surprised, and very concerned with how some people think, if he were to be let walk. This man needs to be fried.


This is pretty close to "local" news for me, and I don't think they have any physical evidence whatsoever. They have a bunch of circumstantial evidence, but really the jury would have to believe that he pulled off the perfect crime in order to convict him. The circumstantial evidence might have piled up in such a way that it was damning, but I really can't imagine at least a couple of people on the jury saying "the prosecution didn't convince me that he did this". I agree that he is a scum-bag, but I find it a bit frightening that someone could be convicted of this offense without the least bit of physical evidence. Are we to believe that he killed her without a struggle? There was no blood. There wasn't a mark on the guy.

[Ragone]

What kinda physical evidence do you need? the man practically fried himself...

Seriously, what man goes fishing.. on christmas eve.. with a 8 1/2 month pregnant wife at home? and oddly enough AT the same lake that her body was found.. hmm..

[mckerney]

They need to give Fox News more time to talk about the case.

[Glengoyne]

What kinda physical evidence do you need? the man practically fried himself...

Seriously, what man goes fishing.. on christmas eve.. with a 8 1/2 month pregnant wife at home? and oddly enough AT the same lake that her body was found.. hmm..

Fishing on Christmas Eve isn't exactly the craziest thing ever done. As far as his wife being found up the coast from the Bay he supposedly went fishing in...Hell within two days of her disappearance, I knew he had gone fishing in the Bay, and I didn't even follow the case. It is certainly possible that someone else took advantage of that information. Also, according to media accounts, a lot of the prosecution's case didn't hold up under examination. There is his possibly suspicious activity, but I don't know if that is enough to convince all 12 people on the jury.

[Ragone]

well, i'll give you that fishing on christmas eve isn't the craziest thing ever done.. but lump it in with the fact that he had a pregnant wife that could pop at any moment.. that makes it seem a bit dubious

[JonInMiddleGA]

If he gets off, I'll be utterly shocked.
And perhaps have my faith restored in the CJ system just a little bit.

I have no idea whether the guy is guilty or not guilty ... but I've been convinced that he was sooooo convicted in the media that a fair trial was impossible, short of selecting a jury composed of people recently awakened from comas.

[hhiipp]

*From the Jury Duty song*

Scott Peterson, lets give him the gas, on second thought lets just deep fry his ass!

Deep fry his ass, deep fry his ass.

On another note I really don't think they have any evidence against the guy.

[Ksyrup]

I haven't followed this too closely, but the biggest issue in my mind was what arguments were made for and against the baby being born alive before dying. I know I read that there would be testimony that the baby was more advanced than December 24/25, and if that is persuasive enough, I don't see how they could convict him. Either he had an accomplice, or he couldn't have done it - he was under constant surveillance from the time she was missing until he was arrested.

[Glengoyne]

And today they got to start deliberations all over again, with the first alternate.

Those other jurors have got to be pissed.

When I was on a Jury last year, we had a woman kicked off for the exact same reason. That was after two full days of deliberations, losing a week would be brutal. I don't envy those people. It seems silly but, I think the deliberations were among the most stress filled days I have personally experienced. When you are near a deadlock, there is just continuous conflict. I am thinking that the only thing that keeps this from a mis-trial, is if the booted juror was the lone hold-out.

[Token Asian Guy]

so lets say, theoretically he walks, can we all go on a field trip to kick his ass? i'll drive the big yellow bus and do my best chris farley impression, but I'm going to eat all of your bagged lunches.

[Peregrine]

I think he's going to get a hung jury this time, but they will certainly re-try him.

[Glengoyne]

I think he's going to get a hung jury this time, but they will certainly re-try him.Boy there might be public sentiment to do so, but I don't see how they could realistically expect a different outcome. Reasonable Doubt is a pretty tough hurdle to overcome when you have no evidence.

[Ben E Lou]

And today they got to start deliberations all over again, with the first alternate.And now....

<TABLE id=cnnBreakingNewsBar cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=10 width=770 border=0><TBODY><TR><TD noWrap width="20%">> BREAKING NEWS


</TD><TD width="80%">The jury foreman deliberating in the Scott Peterson double murder case has been dismissed. Details soon.
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

[CHEMICAL SOLDIER]

Can anyone say HUNG JURY?

[Glengoyne]

And now....

<TABLE id=cnnBreakingNewsBar cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=10 width=770 border=0><TBODY><TR><TD noWrap width="20%">> BREAKING NEWS


</TD><TD width="80%">The jury foreman deliberating in the Scott Peterson double murder case has been dismissed. Details soon.


</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
Wow. I believe he was the lawyer too.

[stevew]

Is it really worth the money of the taxpayers to retry this case? Thus far they have spent into the millions for a double murderer. I know that the costs of justice cannot be measured on dollar figures alone, but it just seems rediculous to spend it on this fellow, when they could better allocate resources to other areas like education. If Petersen did it, they couldnt prove it.

[Desnudo]

I say push him off a cliff. If he can fly he's a witch. If he falls, he's not.

[henry296]

well, i'll give you that fishing on christmas eve isn't the craziest thing ever done.. but lump it in with the fact that he had a pregnant wife that could pop at any moment.. that makes it seem a bit dubious

My dad was playing golf when my mom was that pregnant with me. That isn't any different than fishing.

Todd

[Raiders Army]

I say push him off a cliff. If he can fly he's a witch. If he falls, he's not.
Good stuff.