November 02, 2004

Isn’t it interesting that the race for the presidency and the Scott Peterson murder trial are coming to a close on nearly the same day?

Some people pooh-pooh the Peterson trial as unimportant in light of all the turmoil consuming the United States and indeed the entire world over this election, but the Peterson trial actually represents something very important to our nation as well, which is why I’ve written about it so extensively.

Injustice is something I just must confront. It’s in my blood, and I have to make it right. As I’ve written so many times before, I don’t know whether Scott Peterson murdered his wife, Laci, which would have resulted in the death of their unborn son as well. The problem is that the prosecution in the case doesn’t know either, even though the idiots rushed to put Peterson on trial. Outside of Scott Peterson himself, nobody knows – unless a third party grabbed Laci off the street and dumped her body in the San Francisco Bay where all the newspapers reported Scott went fishing that day.

In a nutshell, that’s the Prosecution’s Achilles heel: The Modesto cops shot their mouths off about where Peterson went fishing that day, even mentioning the specific marina he launched his boat from. Brilliant! They have no murder scene and no evidence outside of a hair that might have belonged to Laci, found on fishing pliers in Peterson’s boat. All you married guys out there check your clothing right now. If you don’t have your wife’s hair on you, you’re either not paying enough attention to her, or she’s bald.

Yessirree, that’s some evidence of murder all right!

The prosecution also has another problem, in my opinion. I think the jury is angry. I could be wrong, but if I was on that jury, and it took the prosecution 6 months to tell me that Laci and son Conner are dead, that Scott got caught in some lies, had a bad habit of sleeping with other women and that dogs might have a clue to what happened, I’d be furious!

Do you know that the prosecution cannot even prove how Laci died? I don’t know how you can charge somebody with murder if you can’t even prove the victim was murdered – but they did it. In other words, they can’t prove Laci didn’t drop over dead from a heart attack or an aneurysm! Since there was no murder scene and no blood found, the prosecution “thinks” Scott strangled Laci, but there wasn’t even signs of a struggle in the house or yard. Nothing!

The reason the Peterson case has national importance is that it illustrates how flawed and corrupted our criminal justice system has become. Prosecutors have been getting away with so much in recent years; this team from Stanislaus County in California actually thought they might get a jury to convict a guy of capital murder, even though they have no real evidence against him outside of pure speculation.

The reason this case is important is because some renegade prosecutor could do the same thing to any of us, including each individual sitting on that jury. This case violates so many established American legal standards I’m aghast! And to top it all off, the presiding judge is going to instruct the jury that they can consider circumstantial evidence as being equal to any other form of evidence, including hard physical evidence and eye witnesses! That’s the way it is in California -- I kid you not.

Is it any wonder why DNA has been used to exonerate so many people of crimes lately that carry the death sentence and heavy sentences for crimes like rape? If a judge can tell a defense attorney he won’t allow the defendant to present a certain defense, and if the prosecution is able to present a case of pure speculation based on nothing more than suspicion, then we’re going to be awash with falsely convicted people.

This judge in the Peterson case even went so far as to allow dog trainers to claim their dogs told them Laci’s body had been here or there. How do you cross-examine the dogs? Isn’t, “My dog told me…” hearsay at best?

The reason this case is important to us all has little to do with the guilt or innocence of Scott Peterson, and everything to do with the current trend of our criminal justice system. If this jury does the unthinkable and comes back with a guilty verdict, every one of you needs to feel very afraid for yourselves and your loved ones. With a criminal justice system this corrupt and biased toward the guilt of anyone coming under its grasp, you have about the same chance of getting a fair trial as you would in old Iraq after someone accused you of taking a pot-shot at Saddam.

I’ve been watching Court TV from time to time, and it’s almost always the women who are absolutely (and mindlessly) convinced of Peterson’s guilt. It’s almost always a man who points out the complete lack of evidence that no responsible American juror would ever convict on. But then that whacked Nancy Grace and her brunette cohort break out into a virtual cacophony of calls for Scott’s immediate execution, and I finally realized they’re not calling for his conviction for murder. No, they want Scott put to death for cheating on his pregnant wife!

If I’m ever on trial for my life, I think I want an all-male jury. No offense is intended to you level-headed ladies out there, and by the way: My own wife agrees with me for once.

Carl F. Worden

Archives

There Is No Terrorist Threat II

How Did Kerry Get To Be The Democratic Nominee?

Conservatives Of Conscience: The Republican Rift Widens

Poll: Bush Opens Lead On Kerry?

Those Pesky "Assault" Weapons

If Being a True Christian Were a Crime...

The Draft Threat Is NOT A Hoax

The Draft Is One Headline Away

Complete Archives for Carl F. Worden