In yet another argument against California having a death penalty at all, Scott Peterson filed an automatic appeal of his sentence last week: claiming not only that he’s innocent, but that his trial was marred by incorrect evidentiary rulings and “overwhelming publicity.” His attorney argues that the trial, already moved away from Peterson’s Stanislaus County, should have been moved yet further away.
Given he fact that his attorney claims Peterson’s trial received more publicity than O.J. Simpson’s, it’s not clear how far would have been sufficient.
Peterson was convicted in 2004 of the December 2002 murders of his wife, Laci Peterson, and their unborn child Connor.
A Preponderance of Implication: Some thoughts about publicity and trials
Did Mark Geragos Lose the Scott Peterson Case With His Opening Statement?(written in 1994, immediately following Geragos’s opening statement)
Why California’s Death Penalty Still Matters: According to Mark Fuhrman, anyway (speaking of O.J.)
In the Drew Peterson case (jury selection is set to begin July 23, with opening arguments scheduled for July 30), Judge Edward Burmila has turned down a prosecution request that the bathtub in which Peterson’s third wife Kathleen Savio died be reinstalled in the former Peterson home and that the jury be brought to the house to “see and feel” the “murder weapon.”
The defense had argued that the prosecution just wanted to use the tub for “dramatic effect,” and Judge Burmilla said he didn’t want to inconvenience the current owners of the house — though he did leave open the possibility that he’d allow the tub to be brought into the courtroom if the prosecution needed it to refute defense expert witness.
Earlier CJA Drew Peterson updates
© 2012 by Bill Bickel unless otherwise noted.
A slight correction to your Drew Peterson story.
The Judge has barred the bathtub from the courtroom, but he has said he is undecided about whether or not he’ll allow it to be re-installed in the house where Kathleen died.
The CBS article says the judge was only leaving open the possibility of bringing the tub into the courtroom. Is this new?
That CBS story seems to have it switched 180 from what others have reported. A few links:
http://tinyurl.com/6py9zhl
http://tinyurl.com/caaxkcy
http://tinyurl.com/7h9ayj2
These sealed rulings make it hard to get the facts straight, but AFAIK it’s a no go for bringing it to court and a maybe if the tub can be re-installed in the home on Pheasant Chase Drive.
If Scott Peterson’s appeal isn’t granted at this point, it raises the question as to why have this level of appeal. Certainly nothing about his trial was fair, from the pollution of the jury pool , the mendacity of the witnesses, the senile judge playing jury survivor and to the prosecutor telling the jury the opposite of what his witnesses had testified to. Far too many ‘errors’ occurred to consider this verdict remotely justified.
If I convicted a man, certainly if I sentenced him to death, I would be able to tell you in excruciating detail why I had done this and could probably summarize the views of the other jury members. None of the enthusiastic volunteers on this jury can formulate even one reason to convict and this despite ‘their’ book!
Shameful.
Oh good lord, voice of insanity. Still infesting blogs with your regirgitated bs I see. Give it a rest will ya. 10 yrs later you still don’t know this case and know even less about how our justice system works up there in Canada. Shame on you as usual.