Media Coverage

[jane]

I don't watch Nancy Grace. But occasionally I watch Jane V-M and before I change the channel, I check to see what NG is covering. It appears to me that she no longer gets the "big stories" unless it is a child abduction. Every night her focus seems to be missing children.

[jane]

Last night, July 6, there was commentary by Paul Callan on Erin Burnett's show on CNN about the Peterson appeal. IMO, his comments were very positive. He said it is almost a sure thing that the death penalty will be overturned, and that there's a good chance Scott will get a new trial because there were so many problems with the case.

Greta had a substitute last night (don't remember her name) and she discussed the appeal with the "panel" members Bernie Grimm and Ted Williams. If you recall how negative their comments were during the trial, I think you would be happy to hear that they have a much more respectful tone about the appeal. I'll check for a transcript later.

[LACurry]

Last night, July 6, there was commentary by Paul Callan on Erin Burnett's show on CNN about the Peterson appeal. IMO, his comments were very positive. He said it is almost a sure thing that the death penalty will be overturned, and that there's a good chance Scott will get a new trial because there were so many problems with the case.

Greta had a substitute last night (don't remember her name) and she discussed the appeal with the "panel" members Bernie Grimm and Ted Williams. If you recall how negative their comments were during the trial, I think you would be happy to hear that they have a much more respectful tone about the appeal. I'll check for a transcript later.

That's good news.....I do recall that, years ago, Greta made a statement that she did believe Scott was guilty but she was convinced the case would be reversed on appeal and that Scott would get a new trial. If she goes into that soon, please let us know.

[jane]

The Modesto Bee is taking a poll. The question is "Do You Think Scott Peterson got a Fair Trial?"

So far the results are Yes 77%, No 23%.

All of the comments to today's article are negative for Scott. But that's Modesto for you.

[marlene]

I didn't see the poll, jane, but I did notice this comment about one of the photos in the article you linked. IIRC, the red-head laughing with Scott is a guy who was joking about teaching Scott how to fish for sturgeon after it was all over. Anyone else think the red-head is a female?

[jane]

I didn't see the poll, jane, but I did notice this comment about one of the photos in the article you linked. IIRC, the red-head laughing with Scott is a guy who was joking about teaching Scott how to fish for sturgeon after it was all over. Anyone else think the red-head is a female?

Marlene, this is the comment I find on the link to the article:

I can identify the redheaded lady next to Scott at the vigil. She is a professional massage therapist that Peterson employed around the time Laci went "missing". Does she have some stories to tell! (I don't think it's proper to give her name here, but she does still work as a CMT)

Read more here: http://www.modbee.com/2012/07/06/227317 ... qus_thread#storylink=cpy

The poll is in the left hand column with the article under the photos. You may have to sign in to get the results or to vote.

[marlene]

Yes, I put the comment at the bottom of the picture, but you have to scroll down, and that may not be so obvious. I think it's just someone's way of creating even more rumors about Scott to keep the hate going.

[Kyle]

I have had HLN on for a few hours today (gag) and have not heard one word about Scott filing his appeal. No "news" is good news.

Maybe Nancy Grace is on vacation!

I am so anticipating her return. Like Bundy said, "Let's rock."

[jane]

I have just lost what little respect I had left for Greta van Susteren:

***********
I know NO ONE wants to hear this … but Scott Peterson has a powerful issue for appeal (to get his conviction reversed)
by Greta Van Susteren
Jul 6 2012 - 3:51 PM ET

77 Comments

This is what I think (and I know this will enrage many) and what I know:

1/ Scott Peterson is guilty. He murdered his wife and unborn child. He is a vicious and horrible person.

2/ Scott Peterson will get a new trial. His first trial was constitutionally flawed. The jurors were “testing” during deliberations and that made his trial constitutionally flawed (he has a right to cross examine evidence against him and jurors doing their solo testing deprived him of that cross examination.)

A juror admitted on ON THE RECORD at 10pm that during deliberations, they got in the boat in the garage (when the Judge was present and the lawyers and Peterson) and jumped up and down to ‘test’ its stability. Besides the absurdity of comparing unknown stability in the water to stability on a boat trailer, the test was not cross examined.

http://gretawire.foxnewsinsider.com/201 ... qus_thread

[jane]

With all the points of error included in the brief, you might think that the media would try to have some intelligent discussions about it. Wrong!!

Last night on Justice with Judge Jeanine Pirro: First, she had Michael Cardoza as a guest. He tried to make some intelligent comments, but she talked over him and kept asking "Why has it taken 8 years for Scott to file his appeal? as if it's somehow Scott's fault.

Then she had a panel of 3 people (didn't recognize any of them) whose initial comments seemed relatively fair---But she kept saying, why does he look so good under the circumstances; he must be a sociopath. One panel member did say this verdict will be overturned on the basis of the jury questionnaire and dismissal issue alone. Jeanine dared any of them to say that he would get a new trial.

What is wrong with these commentators? They make no effort to present the facts.