El asesinato de Laci Peterson

I was watching the early episodes of this with a fully open mind and it hit me towards the end: how on earth could this guy not have done it? Yes, the evidence is circumstantial but a pregnant woman was killed and it would be the most insanely bizarre set of circumstances and behaviors if he did not do it. Sadly, he's a handsome man and has garnered a following of loopy female supporters

Like so many other people I believed the media hype at the time this story was in the news, besides isn't it 'always the husband'? Now that I've become more familiar with how the criminal justice system doesn't necessarily work well and the media is just trying to sell papers or advertising space or whatever I wonder about this case. Yes, this series was possibly biased towards Peterson being innocent, but we've heard the other side ad nauseum. Whether Scott Peterson is innocent or guilty he did not receive a fair trial. Every single piece of so-called evidence was circumstantial and could be viewed in a completely different way than it was interpreted by the police, the media and so many people invested in this case. Besides all that Peterson was convicted for was having an affair, being a liar and carrying on with his gf even while Laci was missing. But, is it so unusual for people having affairs to lie, don't they pretty much all lie to someone? There was also the big deal about how he acted. How many males would be showing emotions publicly in a similar situation? I can only imagine how it would be to be under so much scrutiny whether guilty or innocent. 24 hour media, the police, basically everyone watching him. So he may be guilty or he may be innocent, but come on people he deserves a fair trial.

I'm just gonna keep this short and simple - for a true crime documentary, it's fairly thorough and gives a satisfying account from all sides from beginning to end. But Nancy Grace is in this WAY too much. She may have been a prosecutor long ago, but she is strictly an entertainer who makes big bucks off sensationalizing stories like this. Maybe some clips of her show here and there would have been fine, but they brought her on as if she was some cornerstone of the investigation. Frankly, it's kind of embarrassing and highlights a serious problem with cases like this that get publicized. Maybe that was the intention, but it didn't feel like it.

You can think Scott Peterson did this. But the criminal legal system hinges upon reasonable doubt - "such doubt as would cause a reasonable person to hesitate before acting in a matter of importance." So do I think OJ Simpson killed Ron and Nicole? Sure do! Do I think that, in court, the prosecution prove this beyond a reasonable doubt? Nope! Not guilty is not that the defense proved the defendant is innocent. Rather it is that the prosecution could not prove the defendant is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Remember that when you watch this show.

No question this was a horrible horrible crime. Did Scott cheat? Yup... does that make him an idiot? Yup... did he lie about his girlfriend? Yup... does that make him a killer? Can't be sure. All I know after watching this documentary is it appears the jury didn't get the full evidence and it really makes you wonder if he got a fair trial. One thing is for sure, Nancy grace was still emotionally attached to her own tragic past and it's clear she was biased and fueled the fire of guilt. I think if this went back to trial today and ALL the evidence was admitted, I think there would be a different verdict. This was terrible for everyone involved no question about that. But I think if you go into this documentary with a very unbiased viewpoint, it's hard not to see there was a bigger picture at play. I lived outside Modesto when this happened and I hope it goes to trial again and all the evidence is allowed and the media doesn't fuel the fire.... very well made documentary no matter what side you are on about this...