We the Jury: Deciding the Scott Peterson Case

I would prefer the jury to ge impartial and it’s hard to imagine they were for two reasons; one is the fact that Scott Peterson guilty and sentenced to die makes a more saleable and gripping book than one where he is acquitted for lack of evidence and it’s hard to femur e no jurors knew that nor allowed it to influence their deliberations. It was interesting to see how they drove off the jurors who wanted to proceed differently. This jury is the reason Peterson was found guilty - pure emotion and none of them were believably impartial. Strawberry marching in as the alternate demanding a guilty vote was just the cherry on top. It would have been nice to see Peterson found guilty by jurors chosen fairly who were impartial and not looking to get on this jury to muse sure Scott would “fry,” or to make money from book sales and appearance on tv. Sadly that did not happen.

If you followed the Scott Peterson trial closely, this is a must read. Very interesting, well written, and informative. Couldn't put it down!

This book gave us an intimate look at the jury process in a high profile case. It is never easy to decide the fate of another but they did what was required of them under the law and this book really explains the process and the raw emotions that they went through in deciding Scott's fate. Regardless of various reviews, the jury really had a hard time in recommeding the dealth penalty. There has never been a book likt this-what I mean a book for everyday individuals which explain what really goes on behind those doors. I would have never been chosen for this jury, because I am against the death penalty. I also was against the 12 that sent Scott to death row because of my strong belief. But after reading this book I know now they did not have any other choice but to follow the law and that they did. All those who are eligble for jury duty should read this book. It is a quick read and tells you just what you should expect if called for jury duty. Weather you are involved in a high profile case or not. After reading all of the reivews I decided to read this book-the first book I have read regaring this case and I was not disappointed. Being from the San Mateo area I was sick of the case, and was relived when it was over. Scott had what others on death row did not have and that was a million dollar defense. With jury consultants and expert witnesses, and still the overwhelming circumstantial evidence convicted him. Yes I believe he did commit this crime but I don't believe that he should be on death row. That is my own personnel belief system and does not have anything to do with how this jury came to this decision. They followed the law!!!

It's no wonder Scott turned out to be a sociopath, liar and murderer; his parents are also living in their own sick fantasy world where everyone else is wrong and they are right. Cold, sick people. I never saw them shed a tear over their daughter-in-law and grandchild. It was all about poor Scott. The jury had more compassion for their deaths than the Peterson's did. The jury process worked. Just because they don't like the outcome doesn't mean it wasn't the right decision. Conner never had a chance to live the life he deserved, but with the Peterson's as grandparents, he may not have had much of a chance anyway. I hope Scott rots in hell.

Shakespeare wrote "all that is past is prologue" and that's an apt characterization of ALL the books written by pundits and commentators and family about the crime and/or trial. They have all articulated their feelings, their sorrows - each eloquent in their own distinct way and adding to the mosaic of this story. But until now the jurors have been silent, except for the 3 who spoke in the news conference immediately after the penalty phase and the few others who have appeared on talk shows. There has not been - not until now - a definitive book solely focused on what they thought, how they felt, how they reacted, what they responded to -- how and why. Many words have been shared about how others thought they felt, but until now, we didn't know. Swertlow et al have answered those questions, filled in those gaps, and provided insights that no one has previously collected. Scott's fate did not hang on the pundits, nor the family nor the public's desire to convict him from the outset. It was - as it should have been - up to the jury. Swertlow has captured their thought process, feelings, attitudes and anger - how they truly felt about the evidence, the attorneys, the court. I am struck by how a few people are writing to criticize the jurors for their actions or beliefs but I would say, not in defense of the jurors per se but in awe of the process, this is their book! This is their account of the trial. Many observers have written about how they felt about the evidence, and with all due respect, this is interesting only in passing because, in the end, only the juror's vote mattered. Is this book definitive? Up to a point. Important and clarifying? Absolutely! Up until now so many of the Peterson library seem to be books more interested in telling readers what the authors thought about the case as either eyewitnesses to the court or consumers of pop justice through the media. Swertlow has gone to the source -- those who listened and ultimately rendered the verdict of guilty and then death. The verdict about this book is equally clear offering an unparalleled insight into the minds of those who's thinking mattered the most.