Senator Chris Murphy

You see that a lot with facial hair, interestingly enough. So what you see the defense doing in things like like this case is they're going, well, wait a second. There was a woman in the back and yeah, maybe she couldn't see that well with her glasses, but she insists that the man had a bright red cape and our guy didn't have a bright red cape.

So he's entitled, even though his DNA was found and even though there's a manifesto about how he hated everybody that cut him off in traffic and like all of these evidence. But wait a second. She insists there was a red cape. So we have to do a new trial here.

So he's entitled, even though his DNA was found and even though there's a manifesto about how he hated everybody that cut him off in traffic and like all of these evidence. But wait a second. She insists there was a red cape. So we have to do a new trial here.

So he's entitled, even though his DNA was found and even though there's a manifesto about how he hated everybody that cut him off in traffic and like all of these evidence. But wait a second. She insists there was a red cape. So we have to do a new trial here.

That's kind of what we're seeing over and over again with cases like this, especially in the modern era and especially with – I think this is – I'm a huge proponent that kind of the interest in true crime is a good thing. People are getting educated. But there's also like – there are downsides too, and that is people – kind of believe some of the things that they see that can be one sided.

That's kind of what we're seeing over and over again with cases like this, especially in the modern era and especially with – I think this is – I'm a huge proponent that kind of the interest in true crime is a good thing. People are getting educated. But there's also like – there are downsides too, and that is people – kind of believe some of the things that they see that can be one sided.

That's kind of what we're seeing over and over again with cases like this, especially in the modern era and especially with – I think this is – I'm a huge proponent that kind of the interest in true crime is a good thing. People are getting educated. But there's also like – there are downsides too, and that is people – kind of believe some of the things that they see that can be one sided.

And it's it's presented. Look, I work for ABC News. I'm I'm a firm believer in the professionalism of a lot of the media organizations that cover true crime when it's done right. But still, it's not it's not presented in the legal context. And another thing to remember, you know this, Megan, because you want you're an attorney. Our law is based on what's called stare decisis.

And it's it's presented. Look, I work for ABC News. I'm I'm a firm believer in the professionalism of a lot of the media organizations that cover true crime when it's done right. But still, it's not it's not presented in the legal context. And another thing to remember, you know this, Megan, because you want you're an attorney. Our law is based on what's called stare decisis.

And it's it's presented. Look, I work for ABC News. I'm I'm a firm believer in the professionalism of a lot of the media organizations that cover true crime when it's done right. But still, it's not it's not presented in the legal context. And another thing to remember, you know this, Megan, because you want you're an attorney. Our law is based on what's called stare decisis.

And what that means is we're different than a lot of other legal systems in the world that is Napoleonic or code-based. It's called civil law, where essentially a legislature sits down and they write a rule. Our law is based on common sense and wise decisions based on real situations involving real people that have tested, that have withstood the test of time over the years.

And what that means is we're different than a lot of other legal systems in the world that is Napoleonic or code-based. It's called civil law, where essentially a legislature sits down and they write a rule. Our law is based on common sense and wise decisions based on real situations involving real people that have tested, that have withstood the test of time over the years.

And what that means is we're different than a lot of other legal systems in the world that is Napoleonic or code-based. It's called civil law, where essentially a legislature sits down and they write a rule. Our law is based on common sense and wise decisions based on real situations involving real people that have tested, that have withstood the test of time over the years.

So when you're talking about The legal application of instructions, those instructions essentially reflect 500 years of wisdom of real people and real human frailty and real misrecollection. And and when a jury applies those laws, as they did in the Scott Peterson case, in my experience, 99 plus percent of the time they get it right or they get it pretty close to right. Not always.

So when you're talking about The legal application of instructions, those instructions essentially reflect 500 years of wisdom of real people and real human frailty and real misrecollection. And and when a jury applies those laws, as they did in the Scott Peterson case, in my experience, 99 plus percent of the time they get it right or they get it pretty close to right. Not always.

So when you're talking about The legal application of instructions, those instructions essentially reflect 500 years of wisdom of real people and real human frailty and real misrecollection. And and when a jury applies those laws, as they did in the Scott Peterson case, in my experience, 99 plus percent of the time they get it right or they get it pretty close to right. Not always.

But they get it. They get it right. Sometimes that the right, quote unquote, is is an acquittal. Sometimes they can't reach a decision. A lot of times it is a conviction like here. The jury in this case got it right based on the law, in my view, based on on all of the evidence that was presented, not fanciful theories.

But they get it. They get it right. Sometimes that the right, quote unquote, is is an acquittal. Sometimes they can't reach a decision. A lot of times it is a conviction like here. The jury in this case got it right based on the law, in my view, based on on all of the evidence that was presented, not fanciful theories.

But they get it. They get it right. Sometimes that the right, quote unquote, is is an acquittal. Sometimes they can't reach a decision. A lot of times it is a conviction like here. The jury in this case got it right based on the law, in my view, based on on all of the evidence that was presented, not fanciful theories.

Do you know how many pawn shops there were around Modesto in this area? They call it Meth-Desto. If they cannot connect that watch to Lacey Peterson, if you don't have a serial number saying this is the one that was purchased, how wide does the prosecution detectives have to cast the net