Former Peterson Juror Richelle Nice Denies Bias; Did Not Consider Herself 'A Crime Victim'
SAN MATEO (CBS SF) -- Granted immunity from any possible perjury charges, Richelle Nice took the stand Friday morning to answer defense claims that she lied on her jury questionnaire before being seated on the panel that convicted Scott Peterson in 2004 of murdering his pregnant wife, Laci, and the couple's unborn son, Connor.
The jury condemned Peterson to death, a sentence that was overturned by the California Supreme Court, which left his murder conviction in place.
In December, San Mateo County Superior Court Judge Anne-Christine Massullo resentenced Peterson to life in prison without parole. Now, she must decided if Peterson deserves a new trial because of possible juror misconduct by Nice.
- ALSO READ: Scott Peterson Resentenced To Life Without Parole; Laci's Mom: 'You Will Always Be Their Murderer'
With Peterson at the defense table in an orange jail jumpsuit with a boot on his foot and Laci's family and friends in the audience, Nice strolled up to the stand, took her oath to tell the truth and sat down.
Pat Harris, Peterson's attorney, slowly began his cross examination, asking about statements she made on her jury questionnaire, if they were "truthful & accurate."
Then he zeroed in on the pivotal question that asked -- "Have you ever been a victim of a crime?" Nice answered no in 2005.
On Friday, Nice admitted she neglected to disclose that she had obtained a restraining order in 2001 against her then-boyfriend's ex-girlfriend for stalking and threatening her. At the time, she was pregnant with her second child. She also described for Harris a fight she had with her ex-boyfriend that resulted in his arrest. That also was not disclosed to the court.
She told the court she did not disclose those two incidents because she did not consider herself a crime victim, as the alleged stalker did not threaten her unborn baby. She also admitted to hitting her boyfriend and not the other way around.
"She didn't threaten my baby," Nice testified, saying that she included her unborn child in her application because "I was being spiteful."
"She wasn't going to deliberately hurt my child, but if we fought and rolled around like some dummies on the ground … I was in fear I would lose my child doing something stupid like that," Nice testified.
Later in the day, Harris brought up letters Nice wrote to Peterson once he was in prison, asking her if she brought up the name "Little Man" in the correspondence.
"I'm sure I did, because I asked him why," Nice replied.
She also told the court she had no anger toward Peterson heading into the trial.
"Before the trial, I didn't have any anger or any resentment toward Scott at all," she testified. "After the trial, it was a bit true, because I sat through the trial and listened to the evidence."
Shortly before 3 p.m., Nice's testimony concluded for the day. She is expected to continue her testimony at 10:15 a.m. on Monday.
After her appearance, Nice declined to answer questions from reporters. Attorneys for both the prosecution and the defense also decided against speaking to the media afterwards.
KPIX 5 spoke with former Santa Clara County prosecutor Steven Clark, who weighed in on Friday's proceedings.
"For today, things are going well for the defense," Clark said. "I think this is going exactly the way the defense wants it to go. Then they'll bring in Mark Geragos and other members of the defense team to say, 'We would have never put her on the jury. This was central to our case. It goes right to the heart of what we were concerned about when we selected a jury.'"