• Some jurors appear bored. None take notes.
• Juror No. 8 — "the Teamster" — swivels his chair away from her and looks at the ceiling.
• Only Juror No. 11 shows any reaction to the new schedule, dropping her head slightly at the news of three more days of testimony.
• Defense lawyer Harris asks Joe Peterson, "Can you reconcile the Scott Peterson you know with the person who could have done this?" He replies, "No way. Not my brother. Absolutely not." Jurors stare back at him impassively.
• In the jury box, Juror No. 11 seems disturbed by the reference [to the loss of a child.] She purses her lips and swivels her chair so that she is facing toward the gallery and away from the witness stand.
• Only Juror No. 1 looks at Scott Peterson — and his look is a glare.

I think this case stands a good chance of being reversed on appeal. It never should have been tried in Northern California, so close to Modesto, where the community was invested in Laci Peterson and her family. The Judge blew it when he let the sequestered jury go home after returning the guilt verdict. Their exposure to the gladiator-like cheering of the crowds and screaming news headlines had incredible potential for prejudice. The jury may have intimidated the first foreman into stepping down because he wanted to review more evidence before making up their minds. You can't toss a juror just because he doesn't agree with the rest.

This defendant is 32 years old with no prior record of criminal behavior or violence. He should not be a candidate for the death penalty. The defense is arguing both that Scott's life has value and that the jurors should have a lingering doubt as to whether he was guilty. Witnesses are not only describing his earlier life but expressing their disbelief that he committed the crime. More here. I hope they keep hammering the lingering doubt--maybe one of them uphold their sworn duty and listen.