I think you guys may be right about the timing being ironic after the dismissals. On FauxNews at lunch it was even reported that one of the jury that was dismissed was a doctor or something and the two reasons given for his dismissal were that he just really wanted off and that he was a troublemaker. What the Hell does all that mean? How many of us picked for jury duty WANT to just "get off the jury" and even worse for Peterson, not that I care, is that if he was a troublemaker that means he probably was not convinced or didn't want to convict. Also strange in that case was the boat parked outside with the stuffed dummy with the head cut off. Supposedly Garrigos had a part in that. What would that gain him? He always has a motive for that kind of trick.
At the very least, I would think there would be grounds for appeal of the verdict with so much jury upheaval during deliberation, of all times.
At the very least, I would think there would be grounds for appeal of the verdict with so much jury upheaval during deliberation, of all times.
It would certinly seem like he's guilty but the media plays tricks with our minds making us believe what they want us to and what makes for better TV. That being said there dont seem to be any real evidience against him but I think he may get murder 2 anyway. By the judge throwing in murder 2 it seems like the judge thinks he guilty but not sure if the jury would find him guilty of murder 1 so he made they're choice easier with murder 2
I thought this guy was guilty when he was caught with dyed hair and the cash. C'mon...no spin needed there. How can you possibly explain that away?
At least I would admit that and they would toss me off the jury. Unfortunately for the justice system and all of us, many of the folks on juries are the LAST people I would want deciding my fate.
At least I would admit that and they would toss me off the jury. Unfortunately for the justice system and all of us, many of the folks on juries are the LAST people I would want deciding my fate.
