Los nuevos detalles muestran al jurado 7 no pudo revelar que su novio la golpeó en 2001 mientras ella estaba embarazada. It was previously revealed that she failed to disclose that while pregnant with another child she obtained a restraining order against the boyfriend’s ex-girlfriend, whom she feared would hurt her unborn child.
Peterson, 48, fue sentenciado a death in the 2002 asesinatos of his pregnant wife, Laci, and the son she was carrying.
“It is apparent from her conduct before, durante, and after the trial that during (jury selection) she failed to disclose numerous incidents that posed threats of harm to her unborn children,” Peterson’s lawyers said. “This enabled her to sit in judgment of Mr. Peterson for the crime of harming his unborn child.”
A judge is deciding whether to order a new trial because of the allegations the juror committed misconduct by falsely answering questions during the selection process. The juror was not named in the court papers but has previously been identified as Richelle Nice, who co-authored a book about the case with six other jurors.
los California Corte Suprema overturned Peterson’s death sentence because prosecutors improperly dismissed potential jurors who disclosed they personally disagreed with the death penalty but would be willing to impose it.
The Stanislaus County district attorney’s office declined to comment on the new allegation of misconduct, saying it would address the case in court.
In court filings, prosecutors have brushed off accusations of misconduct. They included a declaration by Nice that indicated she either misunderstood or misinterpreted the questions about other legal proceedings she had been involved in.
Prospective jurors were asked if they had ever been involved in a lawsuit or participated in a trial as a party or witness and if they had ever been a crime victim or witness. Nice answered “No” to those questions. The defense said those answers were false.
The defense noted that the restraining order was a lawsuit in which Nice testified. The prosecution and Nice said she interpreted a lawsuit as a dispute involving money or property. She explained that she considered the restraining order to involve “harassment” and was not a criminal act.
“I did not interpret the circumstances leading to the petition for a restraining order as a crime. I still do not,” Nice declared, according to the court papers. “Minor indignities … do not stick out to me, let alone cause me to feel ‘victimized’ the way the law might define that term.”