• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Blunders jeopardize Peterson murder prosecution

lpast

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 18, 2011
Messages
13,663
Reaction score
4,633
Location
Fla
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I cant say If I think hes guilty or not...what I can say is that I followed this case and the behavior of his fellow police officers indicated to me that they believe something stinks and they are staying far away from this retired sgt....I think something stinks bigtime too. Unfortunately its looking more like he may very well beat it again.


With no physical evidence tying Drew Peterson to the death of his third wife and so much of the case hinging on what she said before she died and what his next wife said before she vanished, it was a certainty that his trial would be unlike anything ever seen in Illinois and perhaps in the country.

But nobody expected what unfolded in the first three weeks of the trial: prosecutors made a series of blunders that prompted the judge to consider at least three defense motions for a mistrial and has some legal experts wondering just how much trust is left.
"If the jury can't trust the prosecution, everything after that fails," said Daniel Coyne, a professor at Chicago Kent School of Law and a former criminal defense lawyer, adding that it is not a big leap for jurors who don't trust prosecutors not to trust the witnesses they call to testify. "The judge has told the jury on a number of occasions that the prosecutor has done something wrong … (If) they transfer that wrongness to the witnesses, that is very dangerous."


Blunders jeopardize Peterson murder prosecution
 
I cant say If I think hes guilty or not...what I can say is that I followed this case and the behavior of his fellow police officers indicated to me that they believe something stinks and they are staying far away from this retired sgt....I think something stinks bigtime too. Unfortunately its looking more like he may very well beat it again.


With no physical evidence tying Drew Peterson to the death of his third wife and so much of the case hinging on what she said before she died and what his next wife said before she vanished, it was a certainty that his trial would be unlike anything ever seen in Illinois and perhaps in the country.

But nobody expected what unfolded in the first three weeks of the trial: prosecutors made a series of blunders that prompted the judge to consider at least three defense motions for a mistrial and has some legal experts wondering just how much trust is left.
"If the jury can't trust the prosecution, everything after that fails," said Daniel Coyne, a professor at Chicago Kent School of Law and a former criminal defense lawyer, adding that it is not a big leap for jurors who don't trust prosecutors not to trust the witnesses they call to testify. "The judge has told the jury on a number of occasions that the prosecutor has done something wrong … (If) they transfer that wrongness to the witnesses, that is very dangerous."


Blunders jeopardize Peterson murder prosecution

Yeah, I live in suburban Chicago. This trial is a three-ring circus.

The latest circus performers are the jury. The defense attorneys have been dressing very similar...putting on the Blues Brothers look. On Thursday and Friday, the jury came dressed in navy blue/black -- all hands.

Unfortunately, I think it's just a matter of time before the case is dismissed with prejudice, and the creep walks. He's guilty as sin, in my opinion, but I don't think they can prove it beyond a reasonable doubt...especially with the hearsay exclusionary rules invoked.

His son was a LEO at the Oak Brook Police Dept, suburban Chicago. He was fired for hiding three of his father's guns before State Police could execute a search warrant and failing to disclose that his dad gave him $250,000. It runs in the family.

You can tell by that guy's body language he's a complete jerk. Every move he makes - every breath he takes - spells a.b.u.s.e.r.
 
Back
Top Bottom