1st degree on Laci
2nd degree on Baby
Tons of reason for appeals with the juror changes versus a hung jury.
Scott Peterson GUILTY
Moderator: Adminlizzieborden
-
Audrey
- Posts: 2048
- Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2004 8:14 am
- Real Name:
I watched it on Court TV. One of the correspondents (not that dreadful Nancy Grace) was crying-- more emotion that was shown by Scott.
Laci's friends were nearly hysterical with grief. Someone was saying how good it was for her family and friends that it is nearly over -- but it is not. The judge left it wide open for appeals by replacing jurors instead of hanging them.
I do not believe he will ever get off....
Laci's friends were nearly hysterical with grief. Someone was saying how good it was for her family and friends that it is nearly over -- but it is not. The judge left it wide open for appeals by replacing jurors instead of hanging them.
I do not believe he will ever get off....
-
doug65oh
- Posts: 1583
- Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2004 10:26 am
- Real Name:
-
Harry
- Posts: 4061
- Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2003 4:28 pm
- Real Name: harry
- Location: South Carolina
I was afraid that he was going to get off because of the lack of hard evidence.
This was a classic case of an accumulation of circumstantial evidence and the jury using their common sense. The defense faced the same problem as in the Borden case: If not Lizzie, who?
I also watched the verdict on Court TV. I love Beth Karas, her of the wooly blonde hair.
This was a classic case of an accumulation of circumstantial evidence and the jury using their common sense. The defense faced the same problem as in the Borden case: If not Lizzie, who?
I also watched the verdict on Court TV. I love Beth Karas, her of the wooly blonde hair.
-
doug65oh
- Posts: 1583
- Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2004 10:26 am
- Real Name:
I just read a rather fascinating article in the Modesto Bee. It's a bit long but interesting to ponder:
Conviction will affect careers, but how?
By JOHN COTÉ
BEE STAFF WRITER
REDWOOD CITY -- Rick Distaso tried to keep a stern face.
But he couldn't help grinning broadly as media and onlookers swarmed exultant prosecutors as they left San Mateo County Superior Court after securing two murder convictions against Scott Peterson.
Was it the start of stardom for a blue-collar prosecutor who stormed back from a widely criticized performance early in the trial to deliver a stunning closing argument?
Not likely, legal analysts said.
"Rick will never perhaps be a household name," said Stan Goldman, who taught Distaso and lead defense attorney Mark Geragos at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles. "But he saved himself from being a bad household name."
Peterson's conviction Friday for murdering his wife, Laci, and unborn son, Conner, might be a career moment for attorneys involved in a case that became a media melodrama across the continent.
But its lasting effect on their careers remains uncertain, analysts said.
For Geragos, the verdict marked a wilting end to a trial he dominated in the first two months of testimony.
But he failed to deliver on his opening statement, pundits said.
He told jurors in June that witnesses saw Peterson launching the boat police contend the fertilizer salesman used to dump his pregnant wife's body in San Francisco Bay. He also said evidence would show Conner Peterson was born after his father had come under police scrutiny.
"I think he promised too much," Goldman said. "He set the bar so high that it made it difficult for the jury not to be quite disappointed with him."
The verdict also signaled the latest in a series of professional blows that included the felony shoplifting conviction in 2002 of his client, actress Winona Ryder, and his removal as attorney for pop icon Michael Jackson on child molestation charges.
"He lost Winona, Michael fired him and now he's lost a death penalty case; it's kind of hard to sugarcoat," said Laurie Levenson, another Loyola Law School professor who has featured Geragos as a lecturer in her criminal law class.
"He's been on a losing streak, but it's not going to put him out of business," Levenson said. "He's (also) not going to be getting lawyer of the year from the bar association."
Geragos' handling of the case easily could become the subject of an appeal of the conviction, analysts said.
"People are going to second-guess every decision he made," Levenson said. "It's going to continue with claims of ineffective assistance of counsel. This is just the beginning of it."
Was it for the publicity?
Questions have swirled about why Geragos took the case, including whether it was simply for exposure and potential to attract high-paying clients.
Geragos became involved in Jackson's case in the summer of 2003 but was dropped in April, when he was dedicating much of his time to the Peterson case.
Geragos and the Peterson family have refused to disclose the financial arrangement. Peterson's parents own San Diego Crating & Packing, a shipping company in Poway. They refinanced a home in July 2003, according to records filed with the San Diego County recorder's office.
They also loaned their son $100,000 in October 2003, with Scott Peterson using his Covena Avenue home as collateral, according to documents filed with the Stanislaus County recorder's office.
Some analysts doubted the Petersons had the money to fully fund a case to counter a massive investigation that involved local, state and federal agencies, round-the-clock surveillance, wiretaps and satellite tracking.
Geragos received public money to pay for at least two expert witness, those witnesses acknowledged on the stand.
"In the long run, I think he would have done better financially and for his reputation if he stayed on the Michael Jackson case," Goldman said
James Hammer, former head of the San Francisco district attorney's homicide unit, dismissed the idea Geragos took the case for publicity.
"This was a guy that everybody thought was guilty," Hammer said. "For a defense lawyer, it was almost an irresistible challenge."
He also downplayed the notion the conviction could taint Geragos' legal reputation.
"No matter how good you are of a defense lawyer, sometimes the evidence stands in the way of victory," Hammer said. "In the end, prosecutors are supposed to win and defense attorneys are supposed to lose because prosecutors get to choose which fights to fight. … So just 'cause he lost doesn't mean he's a loser."
Geragos triggers strong opinions
Goldman agreed.
"Mark took a case in which everyone was convinced he was representing a guy who would go down in flames and really made a horse race out of it," Goldman said. "He gave them a run for their money and couldn't finish."
But the outcome could affect Geragos' rapport with jurors, and thus his marketability as an attorney, analysts said.
"I think Johnny Cochran would have a hard time in front of a lot of jurors because they look at him as the guy who let O.J. walk," Hammer said, referring to a key attorney on football hall of famer O.J. Simpson's defense team.
"(Geragos) can't go anywhere into a courtroom in California and not be known," Hammer said. "They're going to have strong opinions about him."
But there likely won't be any harm to Geragos' marketability as a TV legal pundit, a role he filled before taking the Peterson case in May 2003, analysts said.
"He's still the most famous criminal trial attorney in America," Goldman said.
High-profile losses marketable
Several attorneys have parlayed courtroom losses in high-profile cases into analyst roles, including Michael Sherman, who unsuccessfully defended Kennedy relative Michael Skakel against a murder charge; and Simpson prosecutors Marcia Clark and Christopher Darden. Clark covered the Peterson verdict Friday for "Entertainment Tonight."
"Who was on TV all day (Friday)? Marcia Clark and Chris Darden," Levenson said. "They lost the trial of the century. Viewers recognize the name and the face. … Geragos, winner or loser, is entertaining and he was working it until the end. He's the showman."
The three Peterson prosecutors insulated themselves from the media and were often the target of withering criticism during the disjointed early trial phases. Analysts saw little chance they would want to parlay the trial into pundit roles.
"I'm sure Distaso will be invited to comment on others' cases," Hammer said. "I'm not sure if he wants to go into television. He probably never wants to turn on a TV again."
Prosecutors routinely have refused to comment about the case, citing a court-imposed gag order.
"Where does he go from here? I don't know," Hammer said. "He strikes me as a very dedicated prosecutor."
Associates have described Distaso, a sincere and earnest attorney, as a family man who enjoys fly fishing.
He has a reputation as a strong closer at trial and was "brilliant" in that role in the Peterson case, analysts said. But he stumbled in other areas, getting flustered while questioning some witnesses and delivering a rambling opening statement.
"There are lawyers who can do all of those things; he's just not that lawyer," Levenson said. "I think he really did do a good job of not personalizing the media attention and media attack. He rose above it."
Distaso likely would be sought out to lecture prosecutors on handling media pressure, lengthy trial challenges and going up against "a high-profile, media-savvy, smooth lawyer," Hammer said.
"There are only a couple of prosecutors who have been through what he's been through: a high-profile case where people think you're going to lose," Hammer said.
The other prosecutors on the case, Chief Deputy District Attorney Birgit Fladager and Senior Deputy District Attorney Dave Harris likely would find themselves in similar positions.
"They're not going to be Marcia Clark. … They're better people than that," Goldman said. "They are not going to cash in and write books and go on TV. I don't think you're going to see Dave Harris doing reports for 'Entertainment Tonight' in two years."
http://modbee.com/local/story/9428387p-10336793c.html
-------------------
It made me wonder what life must have been like for attorneys on both sides of Lizzie's case following her acquittal. Off the top of my head I can only think of two (on the losing side) who actually profited in the wake of their loss: Hosea Knowlton and Willam Moody.
Conviction will affect careers, but how?
By JOHN COTÉ
BEE STAFF WRITER
REDWOOD CITY -- Rick Distaso tried to keep a stern face.
But he couldn't help grinning broadly as media and onlookers swarmed exultant prosecutors as they left San Mateo County Superior Court after securing two murder convictions against Scott Peterson.
Was it the start of stardom for a blue-collar prosecutor who stormed back from a widely criticized performance early in the trial to deliver a stunning closing argument?
Not likely, legal analysts said.
"Rick will never perhaps be a household name," said Stan Goldman, who taught Distaso and lead defense attorney Mark Geragos at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles. "But he saved himself from being a bad household name."
Peterson's conviction Friday for murdering his wife, Laci, and unborn son, Conner, might be a career moment for attorneys involved in a case that became a media melodrama across the continent.
But its lasting effect on their careers remains uncertain, analysts said.
For Geragos, the verdict marked a wilting end to a trial he dominated in the first two months of testimony.
But he failed to deliver on his opening statement, pundits said.
He told jurors in June that witnesses saw Peterson launching the boat police contend the fertilizer salesman used to dump his pregnant wife's body in San Francisco Bay. He also said evidence would show Conner Peterson was born after his father had come under police scrutiny.
"I think he promised too much," Goldman said. "He set the bar so high that it made it difficult for the jury not to be quite disappointed with him."
The verdict also signaled the latest in a series of professional blows that included the felony shoplifting conviction in 2002 of his client, actress Winona Ryder, and his removal as attorney for pop icon Michael Jackson on child molestation charges.
"He lost Winona, Michael fired him and now he's lost a death penalty case; it's kind of hard to sugarcoat," said Laurie Levenson, another Loyola Law School professor who has featured Geragos as a lecturer in her criminal law class.
"He's been on a losing streak, but it's not going to put him out of business," Levenson said. "He's (also) not going to be getting lawyer of the year from the bar association."
Geragos' handling of the case easily could become the subject of an appeal of the conviction, analysts said.
"People are going to second-guess every decision he made," Levenson said. "It's going to continue with claims of ineffective assistance of counsel. This is just the beginning of it."
Was it for the publicity?
Questions have swirled about why Geragos took the case, including whether it was simply for exposure and potential to attract high-paying clients.
Geragos became involved in Jackson's case in the summer of 2003 but was dropped in April, when he was dedicating much of his time to the Peterson case.
Geragos and the Peterson family have refused to disclose the financial arrangement. Peterson's parents own San Diego Crating & Packing, a shipping company in Poway. They refinanced a home in July 2003, according to records filed with the San Diego County recorder's office.
They also loaned their son $100,000 in October 2003, with Scott Peterson using his Covena Avenue home as collateral, according to documents filed with the Stanislaus County recorder's office.
Some analysts doubted the Petersons had the money to fully fund a case to counter a massive investigation that involved local, state and federal agencies, round-the-clock surveillance, wiretaps and satellite tracking.
Geragos received public money to pay for at least two expert witness, those witnesses acknowledged on the stand.
"In the long run, I think he would have done better financially and for his reputation if he stayed on the Michael Jackson case," Goldman said
James Hammer, former head of the San Francisco district attorney's homicide unit, dismissed the idea Geragos took the case for publicity.
"This was a guy that everybody thought was guilty," Hammer said. "For a defense lawyer, it was almost an irresistible challenge."
He also downplayed the notion the conviction could taint Geragos' legal reputation.
"No matter how good you are of a defense lawyer, sometimes the evidence stands in the way of victory," Hammer said. "In the end, prosecutors are supposed to win and defense attorneys are supposed to lose because prosecutors get to choose which fights to fight. … So just 'cause he lost doesn't mean he's a loser."
Geragos triggers strong opinions
Goldman agreed.
"Mark took a case in which everyone was convinced he was representing a guy who would go down in flames and really made a horse race out of it," Goldman said. "He gave them a run for their money and couldn't finish."
But the outcome could affect Geragos' rapport with jurors, and thus his marketability as an attorney, analysts said.
"I think Johnny Cochran would have a hard time in front of a lot of jurors because they look at him as the guy who let O.J. walk," Hammer said, referring to a key attorney on football hall of famer O.J. Simpson's defense team.
"(Geragos) can't go anywhere into a courtroom in California and not be known," Hammer said. "They're going to have strong opinions about him."
But there likely won't be any harm to Geragos' marketability as a TV legal pundit, a role he filled before taking the Peterson case in May 2003, analysts said.
"He's still the most famous criminal trial attorney in America," Goldman said.
High-profile losses marketable
Several attorneys have parlayed courtroom losses in high-profile cases into analyst roles, including Michael Sherman, who unsuccessfully defended Kennedy relative Michael Skakel against a murder charge; and Simpson prosecutors Marcia Clark and Christopher Darden. Clark covered the Peterson verdict Friday for "Entertainment Tonight."
"Who was on TV all day (Friday)? Marcia Clark and Chris Darden," Levenson said. "They lost the trial of the century. Viewers recognize the name and the face. … Geragos, winner or loser, is entertaining and he was working it until the end. He's the showman."
The three Peterson prosecutors insulated themselves from the media and were often the target of withering criticism during the disjointed early trial phases. Analysts saw little chance they would want to parlay the trial into pundit roles.
"I'm sure Distaso will be invited to comment on others' cases," Hammer said. "I'm not sure if he wants to go into television. He probably never wants to turn on a TV again."
Prosecutors routinely have refused to comment about the case, citing a court-imposed gag order.
"Where does he go from here? I don't know," Hammer said. "He strikes me as a very dedicated prosecutor."
Associates have described Distaso, a sincere and earnest attorney, as a family man who enjoys fly fishing.
He has a reputation as a strong closer at trial and was "brilliant" in that role in the Peterson case, analysts said. But he stumbled in other areas, getting flustered while questioning some witnesses and delivering a rambling opening statement.
"There are lawyers who can do all of those things; he's just not that lawyer," Levenson said. "I think he really did do a good job of not personalizing the media attention and media attack. He rose above it."
Distaso likely would be sought out to lecture prosecutors on handling media pressure, lengthy trial challenges and going up against "a high-profile, media-savvy, smooth lawyer," Hammer said.
"There are only a couple of prosecutors who have been through what he's been through: a high-profile case where people think you're going to lose," Hammer said.
The other prosecutors on the case, Chief Deputy District Attorney Birgit Fladager and Senior Deputy District Attorney Dave Harris likely would find themselves in similar positions.
"They're not going to be Marcia Clark. … They're better people than that," Goldman said. "They are not going to cash in and write books and go on TV. I don't think you're going to see Dave Harris doing reports for 'Entertainment Tonight' in two years."
http://modbee.com/local/story/9428387p-10336793c.html
-------------------
It made me wonder what life must have been like for attorneys on both sides of Lizzie's case following her acquittal. Off the top of my head I can only think of two (on the losing side) who actually profited in the wake of their loss: Hosea Knowlton and Willam Moody.