Drew Peterson GuiltyFollow

Yeah, I wonder about the conviction (not that I have any insight into what evidence was actually presented). Contrary to what many believe, hearsay is not automatically inadmissible - as we saw in this case the judge has a lot of leeway on what to allow and what to exclude. But it's rare enough to get a murder conviction with primarily circumstantial evidence. From the coverage I did see it seemed they had next to no hard evidence at all.

Oh, I'm pretty sure he's guilty. I'm just not sure the evidence was there to support a conviction. "Creepy guy who keeps losing women under mysterious circumstances and looks like the Cowardly Lion" isn't on the books, as far as I know.

But, again, I only know what I've read, which has been pretty long on sensation and short on fact.

No, but I will.

Which one are you talking about? The Perrotta novel?

Edited, Sep 6th 2012 6:03pm by Samira

Which one are you talking about? The Perrotta novel?

Yes. Just finished it and thought "that seems like something Samira would read". Now I've acted upon that thought, and am free of any existential angst or wondering. Also allows Nexa and I to update your dossier.

He really should have left at least that last body somewhere it would have eventually been found. Then the whole "do you think a cop would have been dumb enough to leave an obvious murdered body where someone could find it? really?" defence would have impregnable.

I actually got called for jury duty next month, although I don't think I'll make it far past the selection process (I don't think pot should be illegal, I think the drinking age should be 15, I read WAY too much local news, I live next to the mother in law of the chief of traffic enforcement and hear a lot of gossip, work tangentically with the office of the last major murder in town, and oh yeah my mother was brutally murdered in 2004.) Oddly enough, though, I haven't seriously watched a cop show of any sort since Night Court when I was a little kid.

Tell 'em you expect law enforcement is exactly like what you've seen on Reno 911.

Judge dredd?

I think the thing that annoys people in jury duty is the whole "we didn't do the forensics because they are expensive and we didn't think it was worth it in this case" aspect of the whole thing. I was somewaht suprised after the whole daylight break in to my appartment thing that they didn't at least send someone over to fingerprint the doorknobs to prove he was in the appartment when I said he was. I mean, i had his drivers license which I took from him when the confrontation ensued, and there was the second temporary license they later found in the bushes that he apperently tried to get rid of so he wouldn't have it on him when the cops caught him. but other than that and my word, there wasn't really any proof that he had been inside, and it would have been really easy to aquire. In the end it didn't matter because he pled guilty to "attempted breaking and entering" and got 3 years. Apperently the judge gets annoyed with you if you miss your trial start date because you were arrested for breaking into another building in a different state and are in jail at the time. So the case involving my appartment never actually went to the part of the trial where I got to see anythign interesting. but I always wondered if that was going to be the angle the defense was going to take.

In the end it didn't matter because he pled guilty

Everyone pleads guilty, that's what the justice system is designed around. Cases that actually make it to trial are bizarre aberrations that waste everyone's time. Hence the lack of giving a **** among law enforcement types. Any evidence beyond what's cursorily required to solicit a plea is just more work for nothing.