Huge Burden of Proof

Dear Viewers,

The Scott Peterson (search) trial is reaching a milestone next week.

The DA intends to "rest" — meaning that the prosecution is concluding its presentation of evidence. The defense has a right to present evidence if the defense desires to do so.

The defense is not required to do so since the defendant is not required to prove anything. As you know, only the prosecution bears a burden of proof and it is a huge one: beyond a reasonable doubt.

Behind the scenes we are hearing that the defense is debating whether to put on any evidence or not — this is a common discussion. Most people guess, and it is only a guess, that Mark Geragos (search) will put on some evidence (two weeks?) but that Scott Peterson (search) will not take the stand.

Peterson was not a particularly "good witness" for himself when he gave interviews to television anchors and correspondents in the early days of the search for Laci so no one thinks that he will suddenly improve and become a better witness for himself.

Plus, if he does take the stand, the DA will be able to ask him questions, too. Peterson may want to answer the "friendly" questions of his attorney, Mark Geragos — but the DA will not have "friendly" questions.

But, you never know in trials ... Scott Peterson could surprise all of us sideline watchers and take the stand. Here are some e-mails from viewers on the case:

E-mail No. 1

Yes dear Greta, I don’t know what all the hemming and hawing is over about being able to throw a body off a boat without the boat capsizing. because if you throw the body off the aft or back section the boat. the boat would not tip over.

ANSWER:  I AM SURPRISED THAT NEITHER SIDE HAS DONE A VIDEO DEMONSTRATION.  IF IT IS SO EASY, YOU WOULD EXPECT THE DA TO DO IT.  IF IT IS IMPOSSIBLE, YOU WOULD EXPECT THE DEFENSE TO DO IT.  MY GUESS IS THAT IT CAN BE DONE BUT IS NOT EASY... SO BOTH SIDES GOT "SCARED" AND DID NOT DO IT.  (AND IT IS POSSIBLE THE DEFENSE DID IT AND DISCOVERED IT COULD BE DONE EASILY AND NOW DOES NOT WANT THE PROSECUTION TO KNOW ABOUT THEIR TEST RUN.)

E-mail No. 2 

It sounds to me like he may have had someone abduct her from the park & do his Dirty work.
If that was the Case then He's Still Guilty. I'm not trying to Hang the Guy before ALL the evidence is in but,You have to look @ his actions from day one. He just has Never looked like a Concerned Husband by any stretch of the Imagination, On the Contrary, He’s looked more like OJ out Golfing & fishing & Changing His Appearance. Who knows but, All of it just Looks Wrong to me.
W P
 
ANSWER:  IT MAY SOUND TO YOU LIKE SCOTT HAD SOMEONE KIDNAP LACI, BUT THE DA HAS NEVER SUGGESTED THAT THEORY.

E-mail No. 3

Is there DNA proof that Laci's baby was indeed Scott's biological baby too? I haven't heard the topic mentioned and was very curious to know. If the baby was not, obviously that would suggest possible motive for the crime.

Thomas Baker

ANSWER: YES, CONNOR WAS / IS THE CHILD OF SCOTT PETERSON.

E-mail  No. 4
Hi:
Couldn’t Scott have dumped the bodies overboard, AND fallen overboard? The news early on was that he washed his clothes when he came home, and isn’t the water only five feet deep in the area where he says he was fishing?
Lois from Chicopee, Massachusetts

ANSWER: THAT IS POSSIBLE AND PERHAPS THE DA IS SUSPICIOUS THAT SCOTT FELL OVER AND WASHED HIS CLOTHES TO COVER IT UP. I HEARD NOTHING ABOUT THE POLICE FINDING SCOTT'S CAR SEAT WET.

Greta

Do you have something you'd like to say to Greta? Please write to her at ontherecord@foxnews.com!

Watch On the Record with Greta Van Susteren weeknights at 10 p.m. ET