You may have wondered why my live tease for our show in "Hannity & Colmes" was so "rough." Well ... there is a reason.... I got blasted with a loud noise in my ear as I started to tease our show.
It was an audio snafu ... and worse, the loud noise I got blasted with was my own voice coming back to me in an echo. It is not uncommon in the TV business to get your voice back at you in your ear from an audio snafu. It is very disorienting (most people sound drunk as they try to deal with their own voices coming back to them in an echo.)
I had the added problem last night that the volume was also cranked up beyond my control to reduce. You may have noticed that not only was the delivery of the tease very, very rough, but I tried to quickly find the volume button to completely cut the audio to my ear (the dial was already low at the studio desk and I could not turn it lower.)
You may have noticed me jump and madly search for the dial under the desktop. But, all's well that ends well ... before the show started, we got the audio problem fixed.
I received an angry e-mail last night from a viewer asking why I am defending Scott Peterson. The note was sent regarding the fact that I pointed out that the police videotaped a search of the Peterson home on February 18 — and not December 27. First, pointing out problems the DA may be creating for himself or herself is not to suggest support for an accused. I support a fair trial — for both sides.
I did point out what I thought was a bad idea for the prosecution: showing that videotape of that Feb. 18 search. It produced no evidence — just show and tell of the house. It was interesting, but did not advance proof.
Frankly, it seems to me that if you think the Peterson home is a crime scene, it makes a whole lot of sense to get in there fast (when the first search warrant was served on or about Dec. 27) and investigate (and videotape.) (Not unlike the problem we had two nights ago where the TSA waited to check a watchlist on a plane until AFTER the plane took off.)
Waiting almost 2 months to search the house (until Feb. 18) is a futile gesture. A crime scene is hard to clean up — but harder to clean up in 24 hours, than in 2 months! The police had enough information to get a search warrant very early on in this case.
Plus, now the defense will make the DA look silly for presenting the tape which produced no evidence of guilt — just the inside of a house and a search of that house. It may have been fascinating to watch but, if you stop and think about it, the tape produced no evidence to assist the defense in prosecuting the case against Peterson.
The defense - I expect - will use this tape in closing argument and say the taping was "show and tell" and an empty gesture and representative of the entire prosecution case. The last thing a DA wants is a defense lawyer making him look "silly" in closing argument. The DA has now given this "gift" the defense. It would be better to simply have not shown it. If the tape had any proof of guilt, it is wise to use it.
I fired off a response to the angry viewer and said that pointing out what I expect or anticipate the defense to do is not to suggest a support for Scott Peterson. What it does do is give you something you might not get some place else — an idea of where the prosecution case may have problems, or what the DA might need to address as it presents its case.
I would think that my experience in the courtroom would be something I can add to the discussion. I assume people interested in this case also want to understand strategy — I am not asking or suggest you agree with the defense strategy. I am simply informing you of the strategy.
Second, as Jeanine Pirro would tell you I am sure, to prosecute a case well, a prosecutor must anticipate what the defense might do. A DA wants to know and understand the defense strategy.
In the end, I hope we all want the same thing: justice and we give the job of justice to the jury.
Here are some e mails from viewers: (these are randomly chosen....)
E-mail No. 1
When you showed the video of the Peterson house I noticed the shower head was missing. I know that some shower heads have a hose on them, has this item been brought up? I was thinking that the hose could have been used as the murder weapon.
ANSWER: I did not notice this.
E-mail No. 2
First of all I believe he is "NOT GUILTY"..And it seems like everyone on your show has never mentioned what the POLICE usually tells you...The Police usually say if they are missing over 48/72 hours they probably will not return..And I am sure they told Scott that...Everyone including Court tv assumes he is guilty..Remember, he is innocent until proven guilty..Look at his demeanor...shows no sign of guilt..even if he lies to the press, so what...I can understand that ..Just say anything to keep the press off your back...cause usually they make a big something out of nothing...And if I could leave the country to avoid "ALL OF YOU FOLKS" I would do that too...Hope you read this email..
Oh yeah..Gloria Allred should change name to Gloria Allbrown...
E-mail No. 3
I've followed this case on your station and the Court TV station since the beginning. Scott Peterson deserves an academy award for his "tearless" choking up whenever he thinks he should be and never once have I seen a tear even in his eye. He is acting and actually pretty unconvincingly . This man is a narcissistic, spoiled brat, psychopath! Mommy and Daddy have coddled him and indulged him and he always gets what he wants. In this case, he didnt want Laci & Conner anymore, being the "fickle " brat that he is, now he wanted Amber. He didnt care any more about losing his wife and baby than he would have cared about throwing out his old golf clubs for new ones~!
E-mail No. 4
Re: The so-called "powerful" videotape of Scott's house taken on 2/18/04.
Was 2/18/04 before or after the Rocha's broke into the home and took away some of Laci's things? If it was after, then it would seem to me that the tape is worthless—and Gloria's comments about Connor's room were gratuitous. The Rocha's could have put stuff in there when they were rummaging through the house—or, more likely, they just hadn't finished turning their 'junk' room into a nursery yet. After all, they still had almost 2 months to go (7 weeks from 12/23/03 to 2/10/04).
ANSWER: It was after the break in.
E-mail No. 5
For months I have witnessed you and your panel prosecute Scott Peterson. Still, in the end what the case truly comes down to is it's evidence! In the Peterson case there absolutely is NONE. It is not important whether one likes Scott Peterson or not, personal opinions do not, should not, nor can construe forensic evidence. As of today, if I were on the jury Scott Peterson would be found 'Not Guilty,' or at the very least the jury would be deadlocked. There is absolutely no evidence to proves he committed this crime. Cheating and a lying is simply not enough to convict a person of murder.
E- mail No. 6
Love your show, by the way. Hey, my question/comment is on the Laci Peterson murder/Scott Peterson trial. I was wondering why nobody has ever suggested the possibility (from the prosecution side) that Laci could have been killed DURING a boat outing with Scott - a la the crime scene could be in the boat itself or simply the bay. The only tangible suspicious evidence was found in Scott’s boat - so why aren’t they wondering if THAT was actually the ‘crime scene’?
There is so much focus on Scott and Laci’s house as the likely ‘crime scene,’ yet there seems to be no evidence of that. If Laci had gone willingly or by force out on the boat with Scott on that fateful day, she could have been drugged or forced to go out in the boat with Scott to the bay, killed there, then thrown overboard with weights around her wrists and ankles. Just a theory. Wonder what you think.
Do you have something you'd like to say to Greta? Please write to her at email@example.com!
Watch On the Record with Greta Van Susteren weeknights at 10 p.m. ET