#248751 - Fri Nov 12 2004 03:14 PM
Re: Verdict in Scott Peterson Murder Trial
|
Champion Poster
Registered: Sun Oct 05 2003
Posts: 24575
Loc: near Stafford, Virginia USA
|
The verdict is in: Guilty of 1st degree murder of Laci Peterson
Guilty of 2nd degree murder of Conner (sp?) Peterson
How do you feel the sentencing will turn out?
_________________________
The way to get things done is NOT to mind who gets the credit for doing them. --Benjamin Jowett
No one can make you feel inferior without your consent. --Eleanor Roosevelt
The day we lose our will to fight is the day we lose our freedom.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#248753 - Fri Nov 12 2004 10:54 PM
Re: Verdict in Scott Peterson Murder Trial
|
Champion Poster
Registered: Sun Oct 05 2003
Posts: 24575
Loc: near Stafford, Virginia USA
|
They should do the same to him that he did to Laci, but the 8th Amendment prohibits that. That baby could have lived. I read that Scott showed no remorse when the court clerk read the verdict. Everyone I asked at work, which was about 40 people tonight, said he should have been found guilty.
_________________________
The way to get things done is NOT to mind who gets the credit for doing them. --Benjamin Jowett
No one can make you feel inferior without your consent. --Eleanor Roosevelt
The day we lose our will to fight is the day we lose our freedom.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#248755 - Sat Nov 13 2004 10:30 AM
Re: Verdict in Scott Peterson Murder Trial
|
Anonymous
No longer registered
|
the fact that her body turned up 90 miles from their home and was the exact spot where he had gone fishing was too much of a coincidence.He was a bit stupid to do that but then murderers get caught for doing stupid things .The fact that had an affair wih Amber had very little to do with his conviction
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#248757 - Sat Nov 13 2004 11:54 AM
Re: Verdict in Scott Peterson Murder Trial
|
Star Poster
Registered: Sat Feb 10 2001
Posts: 18899
Loc: California USA
|
I'm not at all convinced that just the affair was enough to convict him. I think that Amber Frey, once she realized the horrific thing that was happening, actually helped the police by giving them an account of what he was acting like in private during the time when supposedly he had no idea of where his wife was. He would say things to Frey and others that revealed he knew pertinently that his wife was not coming home. Even before she disappeared! He said things like this would be the first Christmas alone.
If she had not lent her help to the case, he would not have been convicted.
As this case occured here in my area, people really followed it closely. The whole thing was just so implausible with the distances involved.
When you read the list of things that really don't add up in the case, like statements he made to various people which reveal he knew she was already gone, it's obvious he knew.
However, with lack of circumstantial evidence, the death penalty seems unlikely.
_________________________
I was born under a wandering star.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#248758 - Sat Nov 13 2004 06:52 PM
Re: Verdict in Scott Peterson Murder Trial
|
Anonymous
No longer registered
|
you mean lack of concrete evidence surely
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#248760 - Sun Nov 14 2004 02:05 AM
Re: Verdict in Scott Peterson Murder Trial
|
Multiloquent
Registered: Wed Nov 12 2003
Posts: 2165
Loc: Nebraska USA
|
I personally don't believe in capital punishment, but Scott Peterson probably deserves every lousy thing the jury can think of to do to him. He's a lout. Some people just deserve 'Cruel and Unusual' whether we can give it to them or not.
_________________________
Goodbye Ruth & Betty, my beautiful grandmothers.
Betty Kuzara 1921 - April 5, 2008
Ruth Kellison 1925 - Dec 27, 2007
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#248761 - Sun Nov 14 2004 03:47 PM
Re: Verdict in Scott Peterson Murder Trial
|
Forum Champion
Registered: Tue Jul 10 2001
Posts: 6168
Loc: Philadelphia Pennsylvania USA
|
I hope Scott Peterson gets the death penalty. He killed his wife and unborn son and deserves the worst the state can give him.
_________________________
“In a world where you can be anything, be yourself.”
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#248762 - Mon Nov 15 2004 12:04 AM
Re: Verdict in Scott Peterson Murder Trial
|
Pure Diamond
Registered: Fri May 18 2001
Posts: 123698
Loc: Canton
Ohio USA
|
I'm not sure whose side I'm taking here but this is my thought about this: I am pretty sure that Scott Peterson killed his wife. It sure looks like it! And do I think he should get strung up for it? Yes, I do. BUT it hasn't been proven yet. That's the bottom line. In our judicial system there has to be proof that who did what, without even a shadow of a doubt. Especially when we're talking about the fate of a man who is accused of something this serious. I sit here not hoping that they fry the guy but hoping that they can just give forensic evidence that he did it! (Then they can fry him  ). It's such a media circus it is hard to tell what is true and what isn't! I heard on the news the day of his verdict, prior to it, that this crazy jury would come in with a verdict that day because it was Friday. They were sick of being there and wanted a weekend at home. Apparently that's typical with jury trials - they decide on a Friday. If Peterson was so obviously guilty it should not have taken them 5 months to figure it out. And to sum it all up in just a day seems odd to me, especially after changing the jurors such as happened. I wouldn't want to spend half a year listening to lawyers either but I think this decision came strangely and conveniently conclusively. I hope they prove his guilt and not just assume it as means to close a case. My Gosh! What will they they talk about on TV if they just stop here?
_________________________
"The best teacher is not the one who knows most but the one who is most capable of reducing knowledge to that simple compound of the obvious and wonderful." ... H. L. Mencken
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#248763 - Mon Nov 15 2004 12:43 AM
Re: Verdict in Scott Peterson Murder Trial
|
Champion Poster
Registered: Sun Oct 05 2003
Posts: 24575
Loc: near Stafford, Virginia USA
|
There is one thing about forensics, and that is it proves who did it no matter what. I don't know if any forensics was involved in the Peterson case, but if there wasn't, then maybe there is a chance that he will not be given capital punishment. It will all be decided by 12 people; no one else has a say in it. We can speculate as much as we want, but come November 22, 2004, when the sentencing phase begins, we will find out what is to become of Scott Peterson. If he is truly guilty, I would like to see him get the injection, but how much of the evidence was circumstantial? Reporters who were in the courtroom at the reading of the verdict said that Scott showed no emotion when the verdict was read, which leads me to believe he is truly guilty. I am only speculating about that, but in most cases, that is the case. Californians have more knowledge of this case than anyone else. I am happy to have heard that he was found guilty, but Scott knows if he is guilty.
_________________________
The way to get things done is NOT to mind who gets the credit for doing them. --Benjamin Jowett
No one can make you feel inferior without your consent. --Eleanor Roosevelt
The day we lose our will to fight is the day we lose our freedom.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#248764 - Mon Nov 15 2004 02:52 AM
Re: Verdict in Scott Peterson Murder Trial
|
Pure Diamond
Registered: Fri May 18 2001
Posts: 123698
Loc: Canton
Ohio USA
|
People (or animals) who truly get 'caught' in the headlights rarely show emotion. They know they are sunk at the get-go. But that doesn't matter. But I agree with you, dg.
_________________________
"The best teacher is not the one who knows most but the one who is most capable of reducing knowledge to that simple compound of the obvious and wonderful." ... H. L. Mencken
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#248765 - Mon Nov 15 2004 03:39 AM
Re: Verdict in Scott Peterson Murder Trial
|
Prolific
Registered: Fri Jun 20 2003
Posts: 1179
Loc: Bay Area California USA
|
Quote:
Reporters who were in the courtroom at the reading of the verdict said that Scott showed no emotion when the verdict was read, which leads me to believe he is truly guilty. I am only speculating about that, but in most cases, that is the case. Californians have more knowledge of this case than anyone else. I am happy to have heard that he was found guilty, but Scott knows if he is guilty.
I was watching the reporting live as it happened, and actually the first reactions from the reporters was that Scott--and his family--seemed "stunned". Only later did they start saying "emotionless". While they were waiting for the jury to come in, Scott was smiling and laughing with his attornies, apparently, and his family was rather relaxed, too. It just seemed as if they were all confident of the jury's decision and were shocked by what they actually heard. And stunned is how I would describe his family's look as they exited the courthouse.
I don't know if he did it or not, but living in the same area I've heard about this case probably every day since it happened. And what I've been thinking all along is that I sure hope he did do it, because since day one he has been tried and convicted and there doesn't seem to have been much effort to find alternative theories. If he didn't do it, then some murderer has gotten a free ride.
Again, probably he is guilty, but the lack of physical evidence and the public and authorities pre-judgement has really bothered me.
Just my opinion, of course. 
_________________________
"A bookstore is one of the only pieces of evidence we have that people are still thinking." ~ Jerry Seinfeld
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#248766 - Mon Nov 15 2004 07:54 AM
Re: Verdict in Scott Peterson Murder Trial
|
Prolific
Registered: Wed Oct 10 2001
Posts: 1127
Loc: Louisiana USA
|
Quote:
because since day one he has been tried and convicted and there doesn't seem to have been much effort to find alternative theories. If he didn't do it, then some murderer has gotten a free ride.
You've brought up something that has been on my mind even before the verdict was announced. And my comments are directed more at circumstancial evidence in general rather than specific of the Peterson trial.
If my wife was to disappear who do you think the primary suspect will be - me. If I don't have an iron-clad alibi, then the consensus would be to build a case around me first. Then the national publicity starts and everyone around the country begins to say "Of course he did it. I bet he was after insurance money. I bet he had a mistress and wanted to get rid of his wife." Soon conventional wisdom among the general population is that I am guilty which increases the pressure among law enforcement to find evidence to support my guilt.
I concede that I didn't watch this trial closely, it's not the sort of news that interests me to a great degree but like everyone else I formed an opinion regarding Peterson's guilt. I felt that he probably did it but was never convinced it was premeditated. He seems smart enough to have avoided some of his bone-headed actions if he was planning a murder. I'm inclined to think he may have killed her (in a fit of rage?) and then desperately tried to cover up his complicity. If so, he did a bad job because some of the circumstancial evidence is telling. But, based on what I know I was surprised they found him guilty of first-degree murder rather than a lesser charge. I don't know if I could have reached that conclusion even though I think he did it. Being a pathelogical liar, dying your hair, and buying a boat without telling anyone may make you suspicious but it is not proof that you are a killer. Even having a mistress and no emotional feelings toward your wife may make you a dog but it's not proof you are a killer.
I don't feel sorry for Peterson given that I think he killed Laci but the whole process of finding evidence to fit a preconceived notion of guilt and the involvement of the media that taints public opinion in a certain direction gives reason to be concernced. How many innocent people have or will be sent to prison or death because they were just the easy and most convenient suspect?
_________________________
In the truest sense, freedom cannot be bestowed; it must be achieved. - FDR
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#248767 - Mon Nov 15 2004 08:37 AM
Re: Verdict in Scott Peterson Murder Trial
|
Moderator
Registered: Wed Mar 15 2000
Posts: 16214
Loc: The Delta Quadrant
|
Quote:
In our judicial system there has to be proof that who did what, without even a shadow of a doubt.
Actually, it's beyond reasonable doubt. And as the jury found that a reasonable person can't doubt that he killed his wife and unborn son, he is considered to be the killer. Therefore, you now need to prove there was either a problem in the trial or that he's innocent in order to be able to say he's innocent.
Edit to add:
Quote:
They were sick of being there and wanted a weekend at home. Apparently that's typical with jury trials - they decide on a Friday. If Peterson was so obviously guilty it should not have taken them 5 months to figure it out. And to sum it all up in just a day seems odd to me, especially after changing the jurors such as happened. I wouldn't want to spend half a year listening to lawyers either but I think this decision came strangely and conveniently conclusively. I hope they prove his guilt and not just assume it as means to close a case. My Gosh! What will they they talk about on TV if they just stop here?
Actually, they didn't take 5 months to decide. The defense and prosecution took 5 months to put together and complete a trial. The jury was only out a week. Oh, and add in the *2* changes in jurors (one was kicked off for doing independent research, the other - the foreman - was kicked off for undiscolosed reasons). Those jurors were kicked off early last week (Tuesday/Wednesday), Thursday was Veteran's Day and Friday the verdict came. So yes, the verdict came on a Friday, but I sincerely believe it would have come earlier had there not have been problems with those two other jurors.
So basically, it took the jurors about 3 days to decide the case. And actually, I would prefer more than a 5 minute deliberation because it shows that the jurors are talking to each other and looking at the evidence to make *sure* that their notes from the trial are correct. It shows that the jury isn't just jumping in, quick making a decision and going home.
Edited by ladymacb29 (Mon Nov 15 2004 08:51 AM)
_________________________
"Without the darkness, how would we see the light?" ~ Tuvok
Editor for Television Category
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#248768 - Mon Nov 15 2004 08:57 AM
Re: Verdict in Scott Peterson Murder Trial
|
Moderator
Registered: Wed Mar 15 2000
Posts: 16214
Loc: The Delta Quadrant
|
Quote:
If my wife was to disappear who do you think the primary suspect will be - me. If I don't have an iron-clad alibi, then the consensus would be to build a case around me first.
Actually, it was the opposite in BOTH this case and the one in Utah where the husband did admit his guilt. I remember when both women disappeared that there were many, many searches for them, and then later, for their bodies. It wasn't until the husbands began acting suspiciously (like when Amber Fry went to authorities about her relationship with Scott Peterson, or the when authorities realised the Utah husband had gone out to buy a new mattress when he said he had been at home) that the authorities started looking very closely at them.
Yes, as a husband, you'd be questioned by police. But so would anyone who was close to your wife. It's basic statistics (check out the FBI's uniform crime statistics - http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius_03/xl/03tbl2-11.xls) that most murder victims had a relationship with their killer. So police use this and go looking at all the people who had a close relationship as they're still looking for the person/body. As a husband, you had the closest relationship to your wife (hopefully) so of course you'd be the first one they look at.
_________________________
"Without the darkness, how would we see the light?" ~ Tuvok
Editor for Television Category
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#248769 - Mon Nov 15 2004 09:40 AM
Re: Verdict in Scott Peterson Murder Trial
|
Star Poster
Registered: Sat Feb 10 2001
Posts: 18899
Loc: California USA
|
Ooops, I see I wrote the wrong word above. I meant concrete evidence of course though given the horrific details of this case, probably not the best word.
Word has it that, because of that boat incident, the evidence will be considered tampered with therefore the death penalty might not be applied.
No matter what happens to him, he will be in grave danger once he enters the prison system. This is because when someone is in a high profile case and kills a child, he is marked by the gangs in prison who rule the roost, or who fight to rule it. Even though they may have been convicted of the most heinous crimes against other gang members, they draw the line, or the 'honor amongst thieves' rule applies.
A guy who killed his own kid is marked for death by the other prisoners.
He will also be heavily guarded for suicide watch. With the 'death sentence' by peers on his head, he will probably prefer dying that way.
If the state authorities were to let this happen, then the state would be taken to task though.
Amber Frey was courageous in one way, but in another way, if she hadn't disclosed things to the police, she'd have been a suspect herself or, worse yet, Peterson might have done away with her. There is a missing girlfriend in San Luis Obispo California where he and Laci once owned a sports bar that has apparently not been heard from.
Police were investigating that link too at one point, but must have given up on it.
_________________________
I was born under a wandering star.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#248770 - Mon Nov 15 2004 09:57 AM
Re: Verdict in Scott Peterson Murder Trial
|
Multiloquent
Registered: Wed Nov 12 2003
Posts: 2165
Loc: Nebraska USA
|
It is actually precisely for the reasons DieHard cited that I don't believe in capital punishment. Humans are fallible and innocent people DO go to jail. And innocent people ARE put to death. But that is another thread. I believe Scott Peterson is guilty of killing his wife and son, and I'm glad he was found so by a jury of his peers. I think that if I'm right and he is guilty, he probably deserves far worse than any punishment I could endorse. I can't even imagine if he is not guilty, but because there might be any doubt whatsoever, I just can't endorse the death penalty.
_________________________
Goodbye Ruth & Betty, my beautiful grandmothers.
Betty Kuzara 1921 - April 5, 2008
Ruth Kellison 1925 - Dec 27, 2007
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#248772 - Mon Nov 15 2004 12:36 PM
Re: Verdict in Scott Peterson Murder Trial
|
Administrator
Registered: Sun Dec 19 1999
Posts: 38004
Loc: Jersey
Channel Islands
|
I shouldn't trust a confession, too many people confess when innocent.
_________________________
Many a child has been spoiled because you can't spank a Grandma!
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#248773 - Mon Nov 15 2004 12:58 PM
Re: Verdict in Scott Peterson Murder Trial
|
Multiloquent
Registered: Wed Apr 11 2001
Posts: 4224
Loc: Texas USA
|
What is it about this case that makes it so very newsworthy and different from other murders? There are hundreds of murders every year in major cities across the country, and I'm sure some of those would include pregnant women. What is it that makes this one so attractive to the media? And is it the media that is fanning the flames of notoriety? If I lived in California, I'd be heartily tired of being bombarded with the issue by now.
_________________________
If you can't sleep, then get up and do something instead of lying there worrying. It's the worry that gets you, not the lack of sleep.
-Dale Carnegie
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
Previous Topic
Index