REDWOOD CITY — Scott Peterson’s attorneys made their remaining enchantment in courtroom Thursday to persuade a choose that his conviction for murdering his pregnant spouse, Laci, and unborn son twenty years in the past must be overturned as a result of a “feisty” juror with a historical past of home violence was biased in opposition to him from the beginning.
However Superior Court docket Decide Anne-Christine Massullo appeared skeptical that that they had made their juror misconduct case, suggesting throughout questioning from the bench Thursday that maybe it was Peterson’s attorneys, not the juror, who had tousled from the beginning.
When Peterson’s lawyer Cliff Gardner stated that juror Richelle Good lied when she testified earlier this yr that she was the aggressor, not the sufferer, throughout a combat along with her boyfriend two years earlier than she was chosen for the Peterson jury, the choose requested why Gardner didn’t name the boyfriend to the stand to refute her.
When Gardner instructed that the juror had hid her true bias in opposition to Peterson on the unique jury questionnaire, particularly when she failed to say a restraining order she filed in opposition to a girl she feared threatened her personal unborn little one, the choose turned the tables as soon as once more.
Massullo requested why Peterson’s authentic attorneys appeared to disregard one in every of Good’s key solutions on the questionnaire: When Good was requested whether or not she may put apart previous biases and choose the case pretty, she had written “no.”
“I assume the events thought it was a mistake,” Gardner stated.
From her perch behind the bench, the choose rolled her eyes.
“It appears astonishing to me,” Gardner continued. “I don’t assume there was any comply with up on it.”
Shouldn’t Peterson’s attorneys have requested again then, Massullo requested, whether or not Good’s reply was a mistake?
“Isn’t that what attorneys are presupposed to do?” she requested.
“I wasn’t there,” Gardner stated.
Gardner’s authorized companion, Pat Harris, nevertheless, who sat beside Peterson throughout Thursday’s listening to, was additionally a part of Peterson’s authentic authorized staff in 2004. Within the courtroom hallway throughout a lunch break, Pat Harris stated it was his authentic co-counsel, Mark Geragos, who had questioned Good again then.
Whether or not Massullo was merely enjoying satan’s advocate with the attorneys stays to be seen. She requested prosecutors plenty of questions, however far fewer.
Massullo has as much as three months to rule on whether or not Peterson must be granted a brand new trial — a replay of the infamous trial in 2004 that captivated People shocked that a good-looking, seemingly charming younger man who performed golf and offered fertilizer in Modesto may have killed his vivacious pregnant spouse and thrown her physique into the San Francisco Bay on Christmas Eve. The our bodies of Laci and her unborn son washed up individually a number of months later alongside the Richmond shoreline. Peterson had advised neighbors he was enjoying golf that day however advised police he had been fishing within the bay.
Peterson’s attorneys have stated they by no means would have chosen Good as a juror in the event that they knew her previous. They tried to show that Good, nicknamed “Strawberry Shortcake” throughout the authentic trial due to her dyed fuchsia hair, stored her historical past of home violence secret as a result of she was on a mission to get on the jury so she may punish Peterson. Additionally they stated she appeared inordinately fixated on the loss of life of Laci’s unborn son, whom she known as “Little Man” in a sequence of handwritten letters she despatched to Peterson whereas he was on loss of life row.
Peterson’s attorneys additionally identified that Good wouldn’t testify with out an immunity deal from Stanislaus County prosecutors, whose case was moved from Modesto to Redwood Metropolis 18 years in the past due to pretrial publicity.
Prosecutor David Harris, who helped put Peterson behind bars, defended Good in courtroom Thursday, saying that she must be believed when she testified that her previous altercations along with her boyfriend and his ex-girlfriend “by no means crossed her thoughts” when she was requested whether or not she was against the law sufferer. On the similar time, nevertheless, he stated that Good was not good at “filling out kinds” and stated she had possible made a mistake when she answered “no” on the questionnaire as to if she may very well be a good juror.
The prosecutor additionally stated that Geragos, Peterson’s authentic lead protection lawyer, really pulled Good again to the jury field after the choose had initially dismissed her, believing she wouldn’t have the ability to afford to overlook work throughout the lengthy trial.
“He needed her there along with her brilliant pink hair, who had a mom in methadone therapies and a brother in San Quentin for a drug conviction,” David Harris stated.
Peterson, now 49, appeared in courtroom Thursday in a pink jail go well with and shackles at his waist as he has all through the on-again, off-again evidentiary listening to over juror misconduct that began early this yr. Laci Peterson’s mom and brother, in addition to Scott Peterson’s kin, attended Thursday’s listening to. Preserving their distance from the Peterson household, Laci’s household was seated individually within the jury field.
Peterson had been on San Quentin’s loss of life row till final yr when the state Supreme Court docket overturned his loss of life sentence. The excessive courtroom discovered that the unique choose erred when he dismissed potential jurors who morally opposed the loss of life penalty however stated they might impose it to comply with the regulation.
After Thursday’s listening to, Scott Peterson’s household was nonetheless holding out hope.
“My brother-in-law was convicted of murdering his spouse and unborn son, and Good was a sufferer of home violence whereas she was pregnant, and in addition a sufferer,” Janey Peterson, who's married to Scott Peterson’s brother, stated after the listening to. “She filed a restraining order whereas pregnant. And that’s data that ought to have been disclosed on her questionnaire.”