Possible Hung Jury?


Apparently, the jury in the Scott Peterson trial have told the judge may not be able to reach a unanimous decision. The judge asked them to take some more time, and not to be afraid to consider changing their minds.

Quite honestly, Peterson is an ass. He probably had something to do with Lacy’s death. However, without any physical evidence tying him to the actual murder – did anyone really expect a unanimous verdict? The entire case is circumstantial. There will be some jurors who will have no problem convicting him on circumstantial evidence, alone. Yet, there will be hold-outs who really don’t want the prospect of putting a man in prison for life, or worse – putting him to death, based on circumstantial evidence, alone.

My one and only question surrounding this case is – – where is the physical evidence? In this day and age – it is near impossible to commit a murder without some sort of physical evidence that will tie you to it.

The hair in the boat? Big deal. I have long blonde hair – – Chris frequently has a strand or two of my hairs on his shirt/sweater/jacket after we’ve shared a hug.

Where is the blood? The weapon? The cleansers used to clean up the mess?

This whole case is confusing. And long.

Did I mention confusing and long?

In my non-professional, non-expert, inexperienced, arm-chair juror opinon – I fully expect a hung jury.

Posted in

42 thoughts on “Possible Hung Jury?”

  1. There is something to what you say; however, I want to point out one small thing that some may not know.

    Outside of a confession from the accused — EVERY case is “circumstantial.” All evidence, outside of a confession is “circumstantial.”

    The jury instruction, I believe, on the weight they must place on the evidence is not set in stone. They have the right, as a jury, to place whatever weight on whatever piece of evidence they choose. (Or all of them.)

    It basically boils down to whom they believe more — the prosecution or the defense. And the jury must decide — beyond a reasonable doubt — whether the evidence presented by the prosecution is credible. If they have a doubt, they must decide on a lesser charge or acquit.

    And, based on my experience as a juror in a criminal trial, the judge has probably told them to work it out. Outside of drastic circumstances, this judge will not allow a hung jury.

    This is MY unprofessional, non-expert opinion. 😕

  2. Lisa, I’ve been wondering……

    Why has this case gotten such an enormous amount of publicity to where similar murders have not?

    Not to down play the crime that was committed, but what is so special about Scott Peterson when sadly, this isn’t an uncommon occurance?

  3. He may fight to not have one – but if, at the end of the day, they come back hung – the judge really has no choice.

    Although – he may keep sending them back into chambers until the cows come home. lol

  4. Oh, and what actor do you think will sign up to play Scott Peterson in the made for TV movie that’s sure to come of this?

    My money’s on Ben Affleck…..any takers?

  5. I have a theory on that, right or wrong – – but as with missing children, rapes, abductions, kidnappings and murders – – the cuter the girl – the more press exposure they get. I”m sure I’m wrong – – it just seems so.

    It kills me the way the media ‘picks and chooses’ the cases they are going to pick apart from end to end. Hypothetically speaking – what if, tomorrow – someone steps forward and confesses to Lacy’s murder?

    Probably won’t happen – but if it did… Because of big media – Scott Peterson will forever be marked for life, no matter where he goes.

    I’ve always said that there should be a gag order on these cases until a verdict is found – – idealistic and unrealistic, I know 🙂

  6. Not only was Lacey cute, but she was very pregnant. Also, Scott is the stereotypical “dream” as far as looks go. But the ass inside brays through. Arrogance, narcissist, yuck, yuck!

    Lisa, I hear you on leaving hair behind whereever I go. My fiance calls it “marking my territory.” *snicker*

    One day, the janitor came in and vacuumed my office. As I was leaving for the day, I was embarrassed to see a wad of my hair that he had apparently pulled of the vacuum roller. I, of course, had to remove the evidence.

  7. Lots of damning circumstantial evidience to be sure, Jay. If they had even one shred of physical evidence – no matter how small, to go along with all of the other . . I can see a solid jury decision towards guilty.

    Scott has a flimsy excuse for all of the coincidences and odd behaviour – which is why, I think, he didn’t take the stand, which would allow the prosecution to blow holes in his stories all day long.

    If I were a juror facing sending a man to his death, or life in prison without the possibility of parole – – I’d be saying “Give me some fibers . . . some DNA . . some blood . . give me a witness . . give me something physical that ties him to these murders” – – otherwise I’d have to say that a cheater does not a murderer make. Stupid does not a murderer make, either.

  8. Lisa,

    I have not followed the case at all but I agree with respect to circumstantial evidence. In this age, when forensic evidence is vital, if they cannot provide any, then something is wrong.

    One other point. So many women are murdered, even pregnant women, and this case gets the attention of the nation. There is sadness in life everyday.

  9. The media is constantly pissing me off in regards to cases like these. The way they pick and choose the cases that they will follow and highlight.

    I have the same problem with rape cases and how they protect the victims identity. I understand it – – but, quite honestly – I think the identity of BOTH should be protected . . and release the identity of the accused after a verdict is found. A rape allegation will follow a person whether the allegation is true or not . . but the victim, if she is lying or making false accusations . . goes on with his/her life with no smudges on their character.

    Not saying that victims shouldn’t be protected – – but I just think there should be some limitations on what the media can/can’t do before a person is found guilty.

  10. Scott Peterson is nobody’s fool. He has been cheating on his wife and lying to the women he was cheating with for a long time.

    He was caught with over $10,000 in cash and his brother’s id with dyed blonde hair and a goatee. He had traded his wife’s vehicle for another and tried to sell his house.

    The tarp that her body was probably wrapped in and the boat cover that it was probably hidden in was laid underneath a leafblower that was leaking gasoline. Gasoline destroys biological evidence such as blood.

    I would convict the sonovobitch without hesitation.

  11. Oh and as for the media picking and choosing their cases, I don’t see 23 posts on any other murder trial this week, so we are every bit as guilty as the press.

  12. Except if the press would report on all the other murder cases, I could comment on those too. OR if they didn’t report on this one – I wouldn’t have a thing to say – – unless I went through and investigated them all, myself.

    Hey, I could turn this into a murder blog. :mrgreen:

  13. I think if it’s not going to be a hung jury – then they’ll have to go with a second degree murder charge. There just isn’t enough solid evidence to sentence him to a death penalty.

    I have yet to ever be called for jury duty, so having never sat on a jury – it’s all so easy for me judge. lol

  14. Apparently, I forgot one key reason for a mistrial: juror misconduct. It looks like your prediction is gong to be right, Lisa.

    Dear GOD. Another trial. Eeesh.

  15. Excellent question. And one I do not have an answer for. Considering the totality of what is going on and IF there IS a mistrial, I smell plea bargain.

    [Again, non-professional opinion here. I’m not even watching CourtTV today. LOL]

  16. Agreed. I can’t see sentencing a man to death or life in prison on the basis of what they have.

    In all truth, I think he did kill her. I think she knew about his affairs and then tolerated it up to a point, at which time she told him – hey, it’s your babes on the side or it’s me. Peterson obviously obsesses over appearances; look at the way he’s lied consistently to everyone – the media, the police, Laci’s family, even his own mother and father. Laci threatened the image he had created for himself. Enraged, he murdered her.

    But that’s just a convincing theory. Not enough for a conviction. And the jury must acquit if there is reasonable doubt. Seems like there’s enough reasonable doubt to fill an Olympic swimming pool.

  17. It’s amazing that I have not kept up with this case what with the way it has been all over the news.

    I do know that if I were part of a jury that convicted an innocent man, even if he is a cad, I would feel terrible. The “burden” of proof would have to be met.

  18. Does anyone actually doubt he is guilty, I mean why else would he change his apearance and make ready to flee the country. Honestly lets just hang him and get on with life.

  19. Come on no one would convict a man to death in 8 days with all the jury problems. What A shame for Laci’s parents that Scott was charged with no real evidence to convict.This trial is a joke and I think the jury is sending a message to the court by coming in quickly with a verdict-you still need evidence to convict a man to death and being a cheater is notit

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top