[phpBB Debug] PHP Notice: in file /viewtopic.php on line 920: date(): It is not safe to rely on the system's timezone settings. You are *required* to use the date.timezone setting or the date_default_timezone_set() function. In case you used any of those methods and you are still getting this warning, you most likely misspelled the timezone identifier. We selected the timezone 'UTC' for now, but please set date.timezone to select your timezone.
[phpBB Debug] PHP Notice: in file /viewtopic.php on line 920: getdate(): It is not safe to rely on the system's timezone settings. You are *required* to use the date.timezone setting or the date_default_timezone_set() function. In case you used any of those methods and you are still getting this warning, you most likely misspelled the timezone identifier. We selected the timezone 'UTC' for now, but please set date.timezone to select your timezone.
[phpBB Debug] PHP Notice: in file /includes/functions.php on line 3526: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /includes/functions.php:2956)
[phpBB Debug] PHP Notice: in file /includes/functions.php on line 3528: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /includes/functions.php:2956)
[phpBB Debug] PHP Notice: in file /includes/functions.php on line 3529: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /includes/functions.php:2956)
[phpBB Debug] PHP Notice: in file /includes/functions.php on line 3530: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /includes/functions.php:2956)
SII Chat Room • View topic - The Brief

The Brief

It's what we've all been waiting for -- Scott's brief is expected any day now. In the meantime, comment on what you expect or want to be in the Brief.
Forum rules
No swearing, profanity, or obscene language. If you can't stand to be told you are wrong or illogical or unreasonable, then this is not the place for you because it's absolutley certain that someone is going to think you are wrong or illogical or unreasonable. No one is sacrosanct -- however, harrassing other members will not be tolerated.

Re: The Brief

Postby LACurry on Sun Jul 22, 2012 6:44 am

I agree with your description that the Judge should be more hands on to make a trial more fair, Marlene. This is what makes trials such a mind game in such that the lawyers have to be on their game, at all times throughout the trial.

I one sat on a civil trial once...it was one learning experience. Later on when I told my husband that I sat on that jury, he said he should have known it was me that sat on that jury....lol....that the whole town's legal circle had talked about our decision for MONTHS. They had asked for like 500,000 and we gave the injured party 10,000 simply because she had previous injuries and there was no proof that the current injuries caused that much more damage than the previous injuries. My husband, when I asked WHY everyone was talking about it, said it was an insurance case and usually those are wins for the injured party in the entire amount sued for. I explained why we decided the way we did and he then said he figured I was the one in charge of the jury room....lol. My reply was that we didn't know it was an insurance case to begin with and also that even if I did know that that it would be tough to pull a fast one on me because to do so is exactly what raises our insurance costs every year....which is true. Even that was a total mind game....in voire dire they did ask us if we ever worked for or heard of this insurance company....surely it was put in there to let us know this was an insurance case...but to me, that really didn't matter. The proof of damage is what the law is. Even on that jury, there were scared members that wouldn't participate because they were scared of the injured party coming after them. It was crazy. My husband reminded me that they had to use the jaws of life to remove the injured woman from the car....and they did....but that does not always mean that her injuries required that sum. That conversation, in the beginning of our relationship, set the tone for years and years of healthy debate over legal matters....lol. I have to say though, in all the years of his law practice, he never lost a case....either civil or criminal. He was good and he knew the law in and out and I also believe his calm and friendly demeanor and his no game playing attitude is what helped him win. Of course, I think he is handsome....and that probably helped too. LOL. Even on that civil trial there were mind games being played between the injured parties lawyer and the jury. It was insane.
LACurry
 
Posts: 84
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2012 3:50 pm

Re: The Brief

Postby LACurry on Sun Jul 22, 2012 6:55 am

I also discussed if it would have been possible for Scott to put in his appeal the differences in the manner in which Delucchi handled the jury in this case, when compared to all his other cases. He said they could have but it would have been accusing Delucchi of being prejudiced....which is why I think it could have gone in. But, as he said, if the Justices read that in the appeal, they might have taken a defensive position and for sure might not have read or considered all his other very valid points. He later said that might be one very good point in an amicus brief. And, I agree. I think Delucchi's actions were intentional with respect for the jury and possibly other issues. Of course, that is only my opinion. But, there is lots of evidence out there that helped me form that opinion. The remedy behind having a prejudiced judge on your death penalty case would point to a new trial....and that could be a very good thing.
LACurry
 
Posts: 84
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2012 3:50 pm

Re: The Brief

Postby LACurry on Sun Aug 12, 2012 6:56 am

Can anyone tell me who this possible witness, being discussed in the link below, was? She was referred to as the Mystery Woman....Amanda H.. I know it has nothing to do with the brief so I apologize for posting this question here, I just didn't know where to post it and would really like to know. Thanks.
http://pwc-sii.com/CourtDocs/Transcripts/Jackson.htm

Also....
Does anyone know WHY any of those that called in tips about Laci sightings were never called to testify by the defense?

Does anyone know if the Medina burglars or the Tenbrinks were ever deposed by the defense?

Does anyone know why the defense never obtained the pawned watch for evidence to use during the trial?

One more question....
It is my understanding that a very small portion of the hair evidence (from pliers) was used to obtain mitochondrial DNA to establish that it was possibly a hair from Laci. It is also my understanding that in order to do this, the hair has to be in the anagen phase...which is, in essence, the live growth stage. Does anyone know more about these growth stages in such that a hair used to extract any DNA at all could be shown to be from a live person?
LACurry
 
Posts: 84
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2012 3:50 pm

Re: The Brief

Postby jane on Tue Aug 21, 2012 8:39 am

LACurry wrote:Can anyone tell me who this possible witness, being discussed in the link below, was? She was referred to as the Mystery Woman....Amanda H.. I know it has nothing to do with the brief so I apologize for posting this question here, I just didn't know where to post it and would really like to know. Thanks.
http://pwc-sii.com/CourtDocs/Transcripts/Jackson.htm

Also....
Does anyone know WHY any of those that called in tips about Laci sightings were never called to testify by the defense?

Does anyone know if the Medina burglars or the Tenbrinks were ever deposed by the defense?

Does anyone know why the defense never obtained the pawned watch for evidence to use during the trial?

One more question....
It is my understanding that a very small portion of the hair evidence (from pliers) was used to obtain mitochondrial DNA to establish that it was possibly a hair from Laci. It is also my understanding that in order to do this, the hair has to be in the anagen phase...which is, in essence, the live growth stage. Does anyone know more about these growth stages in such that a hair used to extract any DNA at all could be shown to be from a live person?


It may be because Geragos thought it was sufficient to bring in information about these witnesses through his cross examination of Grogan.
Geragos also thought he would have the opportunity to cross-examine Steve Todd as the prosecution was planning to call him as a witness and decided against it at the end of their case.

The watch was never located.

I don't know about the hair.

There hasn't been much discussion on this board recently because several of us have been involved in discussion on another board run by Bruce Fisher who published the book about Amanda Knox. If you're interested in this, let us know and we'll post a link.
jane
 
Posts: 55
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2008 5:07 pm

Re: The Brief

Postby jane on Tue Aug 21, 2012 9:56 am

I forgot to answer your first question about "Amanda."

Here's a news article about this: (Link doesn't work)

Woman Claims Satanic Ritual:

http://abclocal.go.com/kabc/news/060303 ... fense.html

MODESTO — As Scott Peterson counts down the days to next month's preliminary hearing, ABCNEWS has obtained new details on his defense team's strategy and what's behind its so-called satanic cult theory.
The details stem from a Modesto police report that outlines a conversation that took place between a rape counselor and police.

The report reveals that a rape crisis counselor told investigators about a woman who said she was attacked in the area a week before the young pregnant woman went missing.

The counselor told police of the victim just days after Laci Peterson disappeared on Christmas Eve.

Another Woman Attacked?
The counselor told police the woman she helped said she had been attacked on Dec. 18, by men carrying out some sort of ritual. The rape counselor said the woman explained that the man had bragged they would murder someone on Christmas Day.

Police have not commented on how they followed up on the tip. In the end, however, police rejected any connection between the attack and Laci Peterson's disappearance.

It is not known if the counselor would cooperate with the defense, but Peterson's team could still try to introduce the counselor's conversation with police.

Peterson's attorney, Mark Geragos, has suggested that members of a satanic cult were the killers. He has also hinted that a female mystery witness could lead authorities to the real killer and free his client.
jane
 
Posts: 55
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2008 5:07 pm

Re: The Brief

Postby GrantPeterson on Sun Sep 02, 2012 7:46 am

Marlene, I'm assuming you've seen this interview, but what are your thoughts at 1:14?

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=655634n

Be interested to get LA Curry's husband's take on this, given the fact that Falconer was unjustly removed because of the media's actions, and the media alone.
GrantPeterson
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2012 3:55 am

Re: The Brief

Postby marlene on Sun Sep 02, 2012 9:54 am

Grant, I don't think it's relevant, given how soon Justin was kicked off. Now, if Jackson or Frances start to talk, that could be very important.
Imagination was given to us to compensate for what we are not; a sense of humor was given to us to console us for what we are. -Mark McGinnis
User avatar
marlene
Site Admin
 
Posts: 143
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2008 4:27 pm

Previous

Return to The Direct Appeal to the CA Supreme Court

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron