This is a partial transcript from "On the Record," November 9, 2004, that has been edited for clarity.
Watch "On the Record" every weeknight at 10 p.m. ET!
GRETA VAN SUSTEREN, HOST: A new juror is deliberating Scott Peterson's (search) fate tonight. Who is she? And what impact will she have on this case? Let's bring back our panel.
Jim, you've been sitting there watching this trial for a long time. Describe the woman who is now a juror.
JIM HAMMER, FORMER ASST. SAN FRANCISCO D.A.: Well, to say she's colorful would be to put it mildly. Literally, the color of her hair has changed about every week during the trial. Some weeks it's pink, some weeks it's red. It's changed twice during the deliberations already. She always wears an article of pink clothing, Greta...
GEOFFREY FIEGER, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: She'd be a good match with Bernie.
HAMMER: You can talk about dating later, Geoff. But here's the thing, she has nine tattoos, four children. She seems colorful. She cried a lot during the trial, especially during the autopsy photos, so she has a lot of empathy. But from a prosecutor's perspective, you want 11 sheep and one leader, somebody who doesn't stand outside the circle. Again, I don't know how she's going to vote, Greta. None of us do. But she certainly stands out, is comfortable standing out in this jury.
VAN SUSTEREN: Gloria, what's your thought on this development today, losing one juror — the judge tossed her off — and the replacement?
GLORIA ALLRED, AMBER FREY'S ATTORNEY: Well, Greta, you know, I kind of feel sorry for the rest of the jurors because when I saw them in the courtroom this afternoon, they all looked so tired, literally exhausted, some of them, drained. And they will have to start their deliberations anew.
Having said that, at least they continue to deliberate. It's not the end of the trial. Hopefully, the time investment they've made and the emotional investment they've made will result in a verdict.
As to this new juror, the person sometimes called "Strawberry Shortcake" affectionately around here — you know, a lot of people are saying that she's a defense juror because, obviously, she is an individualist. She's not afraid to express herself through the color of her hair, through her clothing.
But let's also remember that the prosecution could have rejected her for this jury. They didn't. And this is a person who said that she wanted to become a lawyer, that she did work for a law firm. She did work for a bank. Those are considered relatively conservative occupations. So it may be that she can be fair to the prosecution, as well as the defense.
VAN SUSTEREN: And I might add, tongue in cheek, that serving on a jury may cure her of wanting to be a lawyer.
VAN SUSTEREN: But let me ask Justin Falconer. Justin, you know. You served on the jury for a while. What can you tell us about the juror who has been removed? What do you remember about her and the alternate juror who has now replaced the one who has been dismissed?
JUSTIN FALCONER, DISMISSED PETERSON JUROR: You know what? The juror — the ex-juror — No. 7 was really a nice lady. I remember talking to her a lot. She was part of that lunch group. You know, all the media there have nicknames for all the jurors, but she was part of that lunch crew that she would go with the other ladies for lunch. I had lunch with her a couple times, talked to her in the deliberating room. She's very intelligent and a very nice woman, very, you know, outspoken.
And I'm really surprised that she put herself in this situation. I think it's going to be interesting to find out what exactly she did. But right now, she's regretting it because all of those media trucks that I avoided by going to the podium, she couldn't avoid. So she's paying for it right now.
VAN SUSTEREN: And the replacement juror which has a nickname — and I should add, the reason why the jurors get nicknames is because while they're serving, we don't know the real names, and so the media sort of distinguishes them by that. But do you know this replacement juror?
FALCONER: Yes. Absolutely. She's a very outgoing person herself. She's very outspoken. You know, like I think Gloria said, she doesn't mind standing out in a crowd. So you know, I think she's very strong. She's a mother of four boys, so obviously, she is. But she's not going to just fold. I think she's going to have whatever her opinion happens to be. I do think she's a little pro-defense. But whatever her opinion is, I think she's going to stick to it, and I don't think she's going to be easily swayed.
VAN SUSTEREN: Jeanine, the judge hasn't informed us why he actually bumped her. I mean, we have these infamous leaks, which are always suspicious, sometimes wrong, sometimes grossly wrong. But why don't we know the reason she's been removed from the panel? Do you have a thought on that?
JEANINE PIRRO, WESTCHESTER COUNTY, N.Y., D.A.: Well, you know, Greta, to be honest with you, it isn't necessary that the public and that the news people know the reason, as long as it's on the record. And based upon what I know of Delucchi, that record is protected. And by that I mean that all of this is on the record but in chambers, as opposed to outside.
You know, we're at a very, very crucial point in this case. The jury has deliberated for four days. Now they have to start all over again. But if there is anything that's done that's in any way leaked inappropriately, or gets back into the courtroom, then that would be grounds for an appeal.
HAMMER: But they're sequestered, Jeanine.
PIRRO: Make no mistake, this will be...
HAMMER: Jeanine, they're locked in a hotel with no television and no newspapers.
PIRRO: Excuse me! Let me just finish — this will be a point in the appeal. The substitution of a juror in a death penalty case after four days of deliberation is very, very serious.
VAN SUSTEREN: Jim?
HAMMER: Yes, Jeanine, they're sequestered in a hotel for a good reason. They have no newspapers. They can watch sports and old DVDs. The whole point of this is that they can be sequestered and the public can have the right to a fair, public trial. We're sitting there every day and I think the public has a right to know what happens and to make a judgment about whether or not the lawyers and the judge are doing a good job.
PIRRO: And at the appropriate time, they will.
HAMMER: It's a public trial!
PIRRO: You know what, Jim? There's no point at this crucial stage to leak any information that doesn't have to be leaked. The trial is basically over.
Content and Programming Copyright 2004 FOX News Network, L.L.C. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Transcription Copyright 2004 eMediaMillWorks, Inc. (f/k/a Federal Document Clearing House, Inc.), which takes sole responsibility for the accuracy of the transcription. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. No license is granted to the user of this material except for the user's personal or internal use and, in such case, only one copy may be printed, nor shall user use any material for commercial purposes or in any fashion that may infringe upon FOX News Network, L.L.C.'s and eMediaMillWorks, Inc.'s copyrights or other proprietary rights or interests in the material. This is not a legal transcript for purposes of litigation.