I've found out that there are NUMEROUS stations willing to pay her $250,000+ for an interview. That's an enormous amount of $ for an interview, but then again, this is the Country of entertainment, and ZERO responsibility. She should net 5-6M in her first three months of interviews. THEN the book, and THEN the t.v. movie... She could make 10M+ for killing her little girl and being a Spychopath courtesy of the American thirst for (sick) entertainment. She can tell her family she screwed to go go screw themselves as she lives the "espicolla" good life as her tattoo says, in another Country. Best thing I would do for her to save her ass if I were the Judge is to give her back to back 1-4 year sentences to serve for lying to the cops. If she gets out now, I don't know ANY females who wouldn't want to tear her head off, as Women seem to hate her 10/1 what men do.
The murderous "mommy" skank will make anywhere from 5-7M with her US interviews alone. Once the book and movie deal comes through, she should be worth about 10M. God bless America.
She supposedly received $200K for some pictures before the trial even began. Maybe Karma will catch up with her like it did with O.J.
I believe the maximum she can get for lying to the cops is 1 year. She has served 3, so even if they are back to back, she would only have 1 year to go. And Nobody will hurt her in jail...she spent the last 3 years there, remember and she didnt die despite everyone thinking she was a murderer.
The prosecutor said in a t.v interview that she was in protective custody in the jail. I'm sure she will remain in pc since she's going to be there this Summer. All I can say is if they put her in general population, she would receive that death sentence from the female population.
Quote from Max E. Pad Members of the jury who have talked seem to agree with you about not knowing the cause of death. But neither cause (manner) of death nor motive are necessary to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Otherwise, Scott Peterson wouldn't now be sitting on California's death row for murdering his wife and unborn child. And by focusing attention on cause of death, the jury missed following the damnhing custodial trail: the baby was last seen alive and well in the custody of her mother, then next seen in a trash bag that had been thrown into the swamp. Now ... could a REASONABLY prudent individual deduce beyond a REASONABLE doubt - not beyond all shadow of doubt - but REASONABLE doubt - that the mother was responsible and therefore subject to punishment prescribed by any one of the numerous other lesser charges available??? No matter, it is what it is ...
Quote from Max E. Pad Members of the jury who have talked seem to agree with you about not knowing the cause of death. But neither cause (manner) of death nor motive are necessary to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Otherwise, Scott Peterson wouldn't now be sitting on California's death row for murdering his wife and unborn child. And by focusing attention on cause of death, the jury missed following the damnhing custodial trail: the baby was last seen alive and well in the custody of her mother, then next seen in a trash bag that had been thrown into the swamp. Now ... could a REASONABLY prudent individual deduce beyond a REASONABLE doubt - not beyond all shadow of doubt - but REASONABLE doubt - that the mother was responsible and therefore subject to punishment prescribed by any one of the numerous other lesser charges available??? No matter, it is what it is ...