disneychrista
DIS Veteran
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2002
I"m guessing you didn't read the article. It had to do with how the jury was selected. They have the option to retry him on the penalty phase.Is anyone surprised? It is encumbered upon me to ask why but really there is no good reason they could give. Let me guess he found religion, is a model prisoner, furthered his education and became a lawyer or minister. As a parent there is nothing on this earth that would justify in my mind the lack of an eye for an eye if it was my child and grandchild.
As long as his life sentence is upheld, why bother? I understand California hasn't executed a prisoner since 2006 and your current governor upholds the moratorium. If one can believe what they see on TV, maybe going into gen pop from the protection of death row would be a more fitting punishment for him anyway.I"m guessing you didn't read the article. It had to do with how the jury was selected. They have the option to retry him on the penalty phase.
I heard his attorney (or one of his attorneys) saying they expect him to be released in the next two years.
Let's hope - that would be an unbearable miscarriage of justice.For that to be possible he would need to be awarded a new trial and then be found not guilty. This isn't likely to happen, his current sentence is LWOP and nothing will change that without a complete new trial.
I mean...I think it's pretty obvious he's killed at least 2 ppl. - both wives??? I will admit that he was pretty good and had a very nice advantage with his position in covering it up etc.I must say when I re-read up on this case the actual hard evidence was VERY limited.. I believe they only found a hair of Laci's on his fishing flyers on his boat.. Since they lived together this could mean nothing. I mean my hairs are all over our property and it annoys my DH.. Jurors found his behavior, affair, etc..and changiing his hair to avoid press suspicious, but yet again no hard evidence... The guy was a dog, but a killer ? REading this now i am surprised they convicted him. Others have gotten off on much more evidence.
I must say when I re-read up on this case the actual hard evidence was VERY limited.. I believe they only found a hair of Laci's on his fishing flyers on his boat.. Since they lived together this could mean nothing. I mean my hairs are all over our property and it annoys my DH.. Jurors found his behavior, affair, etc..and changiing his hair to avoid press suspicious, but yet again no hard evidence... The guy was a dog, but a killer ? REading this now i am surprised they convicted him. Others have gotten off on much more evidence.
Your totally right.. back then the press convicted him right away... that I do rememver, the trial I really dont... didnt he gets tons of love letters and didnt he marry in jail?? or maybe I am mistaken.When this first happened I was sure he was guilty, after all I was seeing exactly what the press wanted me to see. Hadn't really thought about the case in years until I wanted a documentary recently about it, I think on Netflix (but not 100% sure).
I'm not so sure he's guilty anymore based on the limited evidence they had against him, and the things they had that showed he could be innocent.
I mean...I think it's pretty obvious he's killed at least 2 ppl. - both wives??? I will admit that he was pretty good and had a very nice advantage with his position in covering it up etc.
Ahhh...yes, sorry wrong Peterson lol.Are you thinking of Drew Peterson?
Your totally right.. back then the press convicted him right away... that I do rememver, the trial I really dont... didnt he gets tons of love letters and didnt he marry in jail?? or maybe I am mistaken.
Ahhh...yes, sorry wrong Peterson lol.
I agree. He is more likely to die of old age/health reasons than to be executed.As long as his life sentence is upheld, why bother?
When this first happened I was sure he was guilty, after all I was seeing exactly what the press wanted me to see. Hadn't really thought about the case in years until I wanted a documentary recently about it, I think on Netflix (but not 100% sure).
I'm not so sure he's guilty anymore based on the limited evidence they had against him, and the things they had that showed he could be innocent.
I must say when I re-read up on this case the actual hard evidence was VERY limited.. I believe they only found a hair of Laci's on his fishing flyers on his boat.. Since they lived together this could mean nothing. I mean my hairs are all over our property and it annoys my DH.. Jurors found his behavior, affair, etc..and changiing his hair to avoid press suspicious, but yet again no hard evidence... The guy was a dog, but a killer ? REading this now i am surprised they convicted him. Others have gotten off on much more evidence.
No way. Ther conviction wasn't overturned and there's no indication that he's getting a new trial. The only thing at issue is the death sentence. I guess the state could retry him to try and get a new conviction and sentence, but that's only for the penalty phase. Not quite sure how that works since typically everyone in the jury has been through a complete trial to determine guilt.I heard his attorney (or one of his attorneys) saying they expect him to be released in the next two years.