Trial publicity - Revision history

Sysop at 03:25, 23 May 2022

2022-05-23T03:25:56Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:25, 23 May 2022
Line 1:		Line 1:
			"We look forward to the opportunity to develop the real facts at the proper time in a court of law."

			I"It is a legal matter and my lawyers have directed me not to discuss it."

	State v. Avery, 374 S.C. 524, 649 S.E.2d 102 (Ct. App. 2007) (venue change denied where a vast majority of potential jurors recalled nothing about defendant and could remember only that crime had been committed.)		State v. Avery, 374 S.C. 524, 649 S.E.2d 102 (Ct. App. 2007) (venue change denied where a vast majority of potential jurors recalled nothing about defendant and could remember only that crime had been committed.)

	Gag order in Scott Peterson case and ~~Michale~~ Jackson case.		Gag order in Scott Peterson case and Michael Jackson case.

Sysop at 01:47, 23 May 2022

2022-05-23T01:47:33Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:47, 23 May 2022
Line 1:		Line 1:

	State v. Avery, 374 S.C. 524, 649 S.E.2d 102 (Ct. App. 2007) (venue change denied where a vast majority of potential jurors recalled nothing about defendant and could remember only that crime had been committed.)		State v. Avery, 374 S.C. 524, 649 S.E.2d 102 (Ct. App. 2007) (venue change denied where a vast majority of potential jurors recalled nothing about defendant and could remember only that crime had been committed.)

			Gag order in Scott Peterson case and Michale Jackson case.

Sysop: Created page with " State v. Avery, 374 S.C. 524, 649 S.E.2d 102 (Ct. App. 2007) (venue change denied where a vast majority of potential jurors recalled nothing about defendant and could remember only that crime had been committed.)"

2022-05-23T01:46:34Z

Created page with " State v. Avery, 374 S.C. 524, 649 S.E.2d 102 (Ct. App. 2007) (venue change denied where a vast majority of potential jurors recalled nothing about defendant and could remember only that crime had been committed.)"

New page

State v. Avery, 374 S.C. 524, 649 S.E.2d 102 (Ct. App. 2007) (venue change denied where a vast majority of potential jurors recalled nothing about defendant and could remember only that crime had been committed.)