The California Supreme Court ruled that Scott Peterson’s 2004 murder convictions because of his pregnant wife, Laci, and unborn child, Connor, should be reexamined.
The court arranged, on Wednesday, October 14, the case have sent back into the San Mateo County Superior Court to ascertain whether Peterson, 47, ought to be given a new trial on the premise that a juror”committed prejudicial misconduct by not revealing her previous engagement with other legal proceeding, such as but not confined to become the victim of a crime,” according to this Los Angeles Times.
The paper reported that Juror No. 7 neglected to show that, in 2000, she filed a suit against her boyfriend ex-girlfriend and got a restraining order following the ex allegedly harassed her while she was pregnant. Peterson’s attorney Cliff Gardner reacted to this information with an announcement to In Touch.
“We’re definitely pleased that, because it did in Placing Scott’s punishment on direct appeal a few weeks before, the Supreme Court acknowledged the value of a rather chosen jury,” he explained. “Specifically, we agree not just with the Court’s clear concern regarding juror candor throughout the jury selection procedure, but using its popularity about how fundamental the misconduct has been into the capacity of the prosecution to reach a reasonable conclusion in this situation.”
Laci, 27, went missing on Christmas Eve at 2002. Her body has been found at the San Francisco Bay in April 2003, and also the reason for death couldn’t be determined. An autopsy of how Laci’s body revealed there has been a”substantial cut” made into the fetus’ body. Peterson has been sentenced to death in 2005 after being convicted of first-degree murder with special conditions, along with second-degree murder to the couple’s unborn child. Back in August, his death penalty sentence has been reversed from the California Supreme Courtin June.
“Peterson claims his trial was faulty for many reasons, starting with the odd number of pretrial publicity which surrounded the situation,” the court stated in its judgment, according to In Touch. “We refuse Peterson’s claim he received an unfair trial regarding guilt and so affirm his convictions for murder”
The court added that there had been”a collection of obvious and important errors in jury decision which, under longstanding United States Supreme Court precedent, jeopardized Peterson’s right to an unbiased jury in the punishment stage.”