Peterson Jurors Pen New Book

Scott Peterson Was Convicted Of Murdering His Wife Two Years Ago

(CBS)  It was Christmas Eve 2002 when a beautiful, young pregnant woman disappeared from her Modesto, Calif., home. The case riveted the nation as the search for Laci Peterson dragged on, with her husband at the center.

But Scott Peterson quickly came under suspicion and was arrested just days after Laci's body, and the body of her unborn son Connor, were pulled from the San Francisco Bay.

The high-priced lawyers went to work, offering up theories of devil worshippers to kidnappers. But jurors also heard damming testimony from Scott's mistress Amber Frey, who taped their phone conversations while Laci was still missing

After six months in court jurors, who sat through lengthy testimony and gruesome photos, finally offered their verdict, finding Peterson guilty.

Peterson was sent to death row.

While the trial was over, the experience has stayed with the jurors, seven of whom have penned a new book, titled "We, The Jury."

Jurors Richelle Nice and John Guinasso told their stories for the book, which was co-written by Frank Swertlow. The three visited The Early Show to talk about the experience with Hannah Storm.

Scott Peterson has maintained his innocence but Nice says she believes "without a doubt" that he was guilty and that the jury delivered the right verdict.

Asked what convinced her of his guilt during the trial, Nice says, "I think it was all the evidence. When we were in the deliberating room, it wasn't one thing, a major thing was the bodies washing up where he went fishing. But I think just all the evidence together is what showed us his guilt."

For John Guinasso, the evidence was also the overwhelming factor in making his decision. "The last piece of the puzzle was where the bodies washed up. But that had to be the final piece because if that didn't happen, maybe there would have been a different verdict," he says.

Talking about the experience of being a juror in such a high-profile case, Guinasso says, "When you are a juror, you are sort of in your own vacuum in the sense you have to ignore everything else. You are told certain instructions what to do. You just follow them, put your head down and go to the courtroom without, ignoring the media, even though you know it's there. It's more after the trial is over then you realize how big of a media event it was."

[stezzer]

cbsvisitor.

A very good post. Your arguments are very well thought out and reasoned.

I'm also glad that most people agree that jurors should not make money from doing their duty.

[cbsvisitor1]

I too feel it would be wrong to make money out of this awful tragedy and I agree with the idea of giving the proceeds to victims' rights groups. I can't comprehend why juror Richelle Nice ever hoped that Peterson might confess TO HER (who put him on death row!) when he has so consistently proclaimed his innocence to everyone for so long. If he EVER confesses, I would imagine it wouldn't be before he has exhausted all legal avenues and appeals. Was she so naive as to think that she could be THAT special to Peterson that he would forfeit the fight for his life to give her what she wanted? This is the same guy whose wife was ready to give birth to his son while the authorities, her family & friends were frantically looking for her. At the very same time, while he was publicly PRETENDING to be looking for his missing pregnant wife, he was also able to ACT like a romantic lover to another unsuspecting woman and claiming to be single and available!!! I think perhaps Richelle Nice, like so many of us has strong moral decency and conscience and went looking for the same in the likes of Peterson who seems to be void of such human qualities. His very pregnant wife wasn't special enough to him, nor was his son, nor the girlfriend; no one is. For her sake, Nice needs to disconnect with Peterson if she ever wants to move forward. Has he not stolen and destroyed enough?

[j4william]

I do not have any problem with writing the book and I do believe in freedom of speech. But I fail to see why one juror (Richelle Nice) would write to Scott Peterson. Especially how much he has manipulated more than one woman in his life and others. Stay away - far away. Whats done is done, the punishment fits the crime and he's already been found and IS guilty.

[love2live1]

I think writing the book may help the jurors heal. I have no doubt this was a tramatic experience. I don't believe they should profit from the book sales. It would serve well to donate the money to victim right groups.

[anvilheadsix]

It is wrong for someone to pursue profit from being on a jury.

[stezzer]

I don't know, maybe I'm wrong. I just think being a juror is a duty.

I don't feel comfortable with profit being made from a criminal act.

Do you think I'm wrong? I'm not being flippant, I seriously would like your opinion.

[kalatur1]

Stezzer, why shouldn't the jurors profit from their books?

[stezzer]

I don't doubt that being a juror on this case must have been a deeply traumatic experience. But why continue subjecting yourself to that trauma by writing a book?

I hope the profits go to some kind of victim support group.