El asesinato de Laci Peterson

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.

Being from Modesto I was very interested in this series. I know the area from which Laci disappeared and was eager to watch this series to confirm that he was guilty. So much for that! I'm not sure I've ever seen such compelling evidence that he is NOT guilty. He's a loser for sure, a cheater and a liar, and an incredible narcissist. But guilty of murdering Laci, I'm afraid not. Or if he is, then he is quite possibly the most oblivious human to walk the planet.

For those of you who are so certain that he IS guilty, I'm guessing you're also the people who think O.J. is innocent. You clearly had your mind made up prior to watching this show and are not going to change your mind no matter what. Well, maybe if you had video of Scott being in Tulsa during the 4 hours surrounding her disappearance. But aside from that you're no better than Nancy Grace - who, by the way, should be put in a jail cell along with Gloria Gomez just for behaving the way they did during the lead up to the trial and the trial.

There is not one piece of solid evidence (circumstantial or otherwise) that points to Scott being guilty. There is a ton of evidence that he is narcissistic, a cheater, and a liar, and incredibly apathetic - but evidence that he is guilty? Not one shred. The fact that the police lied about the burglars who robbed the house across the street should be evidence enough to get him a new trial. That nobody thinks it's important that the witness who saw the van that day not only told police, but that the police then said it was a different day (when in fact, the front of that house was covered with news people the day the police say the place was robbed) is just insane.

Like I say, I was CERTAIN that he was guilty. Would have been the first to convict based on what I'd seen and heard in the news - but it's simply not true. It's a shame that the police can't ever admit wrongdoing and try to right the fact that this guy sits on death row and I'm about 90% sure he's not guilty. I can't say 100% because I wasn't there.

A good series - it clearly does lean toward trying to defend Scott - but that's not what changed my mind. I can see that for what it is. It's the lack of evidence, the fact that the jury was biased, the crazy alternate juror who ended up convincing some of the folks to vote guilty (she should be put in jail along with Nancy Grace and Gloria Gomez - they should all share a cell), and the fact that most of what we'd seen/read in the papers was distorted so badly that we didn't have all the facts.

It's a shame - I'm sure, as he said, that he was convicted by the media and his apathy certainly didn't help matters. I'm guessing he'll be thinking about that for many years to come.

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.

Sad, he had no pity for his wife and unborn child. I feel sorry for his family, he is never getting out. He is as guilty as sin. If all these claims made in this documentary are true, why weren't those people called to testify? Because they didn't want to commit perjury or be shown as a liar(s). He is going to die in prison.

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.