[ad_1]
Scott Peterson, who was convicted by a California jury of killing his pregnant spouse Laci Peterson in 2002, has been denied a brand new trial.
The 50-year-old Peterson and his authorized group argued that a juror in his 2004 homicide trial dedicated misconduct and he deserved a brand new trial. Nonetheless, on Tuesday a San Mateo County Superior Courtroom choose dominated she had not.
In an announcement to CBS Information, Peterson’s legal professional, Pat Harris, mentioned they have been “upset” by the ruling, however that “this case will not be over,” including that that they had new proof that supposedly proves Peterson didn’t homicide his spouse.
Laci’s disappearance in 2002, and Peterson’s subsequent homicide conviction, gained widespread media consideration. A jury convicted him of first-degree homicide of his 27-year-old spouse, in addition to second-degree homicide of their unborn son that they had deliberate to call Conner. Prosecutors mentioned that Peterson dumped Laci’s physique into San Francisco Bay on Christmas Eve of 2002.
Jurors imposed the loss of life penalty after convicting Peterson.
Peterson’s attorneys alleged that juror No. 7, Richelle Good, lied on a pre-trail questionnaire, omitting the truth that she acquired a restraining order towards her then-boyfriend’s ex-girlfriend, as a result of she feared for her the protection of her unborn baby, in response to CBS San Francisco. Peterson’s attorneys argued she was biased towards him.
San Mateo County Superior Courtroom Decide Anne-Christine Massullo allowed Peterson and his attorneys to argue for a brand new trial in courtroom throughout a number of days of testimony in an August listening to. Good testified she held no ailing will towards Peterson, till she heard proof as a member of the jury.
“The courtroom concludes that Juror No. 7’s (Good) responses (on the questionnaire) weren’t motivated by pre-existing or improper bias towards petitioner (Peterson), however as an alternative have been the results of a mixture of fine religion misunderstanding of the questions and sloppiness in answering,” Massullo wrote in Tuesday’s ruling.
Harris mentioned in his assertion that he “respectfully” disagreed with the choose’s choice that Good didn’t commit misconduct, claiming that it units a nasty precedent for future circumstances.
“Jury questionnaires and the attorneys who learn them rely on the honesty of the solutions with a purpose to get a good trial. It would make it tough if jurors consider they will lie and there shall be no repercussions,” Harris mentioned in his assertion.
Peterson was moved off loss of life row in October, greater than two years after the California Supreme Courtroom overturned his loss of life sentence, in response to CBS San Francisco. He was moved to Mule Creek State Jail, east of Sacramento.
[ad_2]
Source link