Scott Peterson Faces Death Penalty

[bad14u]

Originally posted by THE BOUNCER
He is a killer of a child!! lol. He is the killer of 2 people and both his family. I dont know what the hell your thinking on this one.

:agree:

[dreamgirl]

It is a sad day when a crime like this happens... I am very glad that the jury is holding Scott Peterson responsible... too bad they didn't live here in Ohio, we always seem to be putting people who are on death row to death here.

[sana]

Originally posted by THE BOUNCER
Sana, he did it. Stop being a tool.

i still don't think he did.

i think they should have looked into the sleasy massage therapist who has many affairs with married men.

she's psycho and needy.

[sana]

Originally posted by THE BOUNCER
He is a killer of a child!! lol. He is the killer of 2 people and both his family. I dont know what the hell your thinking on this one.

the menedez brothers killed their parents to get their inheritance.

did they get the death sentence? no.

tell me - how is what scott peterson supposedly did so much worse than what lyle and eric menendez did? in addition to that - they had PHYSICAL EVIDENCE of the crime tying the two brothers to the murders. they have NO physical evidence in this case. it's completely circumstancial.

one of the jurors who got dismissed said there was a huge outside pressure for them to convict.

it's the entire attitude of the area (and maybe even the country) thinking that he's guilty before the man even went to trial.

[Bouncer]

Sana he lied to many people about where he was. He lied to his girlfriend about where he was. He sold lacy's car in like 3 days after she was missing. He was caught with 30,000$ going towards mexico. Now I ask you, is that how a man that just lost his baby and wife acts?

[Puddles]

Originally posted by sana
i still don't think he did.

i think they should have looked into the sleasy massage therapist who has many affairs with married men.

she's psycho and needy.

If she did it and he covered up for her, then he's still guilty in my eyes. To protect anyone who did something that greedy and then to continue a relationship with them is as bad as comitting the crime itself.

[Stonecold54]

Originally posted by sana
he was stoic and was sentenced to death for it. i don't think the jury was right in doing that.

the fact that someone is stoic and not flailing about and screaming (as a family trait more likely than not since his mother showed no emotion when she heard the sentence either) does not mean that they are not torn up inside.

i believe that the death sentence should be reserved for the worst of the worse. the serial killers, the killers and rapists of children, the people who have done things that cannot be explained.

plus - i don't think he's guilty and i believe that (especially in california) he was never seen as "innocent until proven guilty" - they viewed him as guilty and was expecting the defense to prove his innocence. that is not how the criminal justice system should work.

i believe that the jury was swayed too much by the huge amounts of emotion and bias against him out in the area.

i browsed the modesto bee once while the trial was going on. and to read the articles on the trial from that local paper, was to read an op-ed piece on why he was guilty.

it was not a fair trial, he didn't get a fair shake, and his family does not deserve to see him sentenced to death.

I agree. I hate when juries get interviewed after the case. they usually come across as morons and these ones didn't fail. Emotions should never come into play on a decision. I hate when people are "expected" to act a certain way in a certain situation. Everyone always preaches that we are all different but then we have juries who expect a person to react how they think he should. And I don't understand why the families get to talk at sentencing. it should be based on the severity of the crime and circumstances which were already brought out in the trial.

[sana]

Originally posted by Puddles
That what makes him such a worthless piece of shit. I'd have more sympathy for him if he was some phsycho that killed a stranger, but to kill the person you pledge your life to AND your child??? And he did it not because she was abusive to him or something where there's some logical reason, but he did it because he wanted an easy way out of a marriage and fatherhood. Damn him. HIS SOUL WILL ROT IN HELL.

but see how vehemently you're convinced he's guilty? i'm sure you've felt this way since the day the slutty massage therapist came out and said he had an affair.

i think too many people judged him as guilty before he even had a chance.

remember - this was a circumstancial case. they don't even know what killed the poor woman. they have no evidence tying him to the murder. just a bunch of speculation.

really - and to have the key prosecution witness be a woman who admitedly sleeps around with married men?

people were swayed by the pretty pictures of laci and wanted someone to blame. he was a cheating husband and so there was no feeling of sympathy towards him so he was convicted in so many people's eyes before he was even put on trial.

[Bouncer]

Originally posted by sana


one of the jurors who got dismissed said there was a huge outside pressure for them to convict.

it's the entire attitude of the area (and maybe even the country) thinking that he's guilty before the man even went to trial.

I guess you were one of the people saying OJ was innocent when the rest of the country knew he was guilty?

[sana]

Originally posted by THE BOUNCER
I guess you were one of the people saying OJ was innocent when the rest of the country knew he was guilty?

no, that was different.

there WAS physical evidence. there was TONS of physical evidence. but the prosecution was screwed over by messy police work.

doubt was cast in the case by the defense.

remember - they have to find him guilty BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT.

the peterson jury - i believe - ignored that.

he lied to his slutty girlfriend b/c he hadn't told her he was married still. he told people he was going to go golfing but went fishing instead - can't that happen? he had money and was on his way to an exclusive golf course in san diego.

you see it either one way or another. i see that there's reasonable doubt that he did it.

either way - i think those jurors was wacky and believe he was guilty and was expecting the defense to prove his innocence.

[Bouncer]

Originally posted by THE BOUNCER
Sana he lied to many people about where he was. He lied to his girlfriend about where he was. He sold lacy's car in like 3 days after she was missing. He was caught with 30,000$ going towards mexico. Now I ask you, is that how a man that just lost his baby and wife acts?

[sana]

btw - i do think he's a lying scumbag. no doubt about that. i just don't think that he was given a fair trial b/c so many people were already convinced of his guilt.

the jury expected the defense to prove his innocence from their standpoint that he was already guilty.

and to apply the death penalty because he was stoic?

[Puddles]

Originally posted by sana
remember - they have to find him guilty BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT.

Exactly. There was no REASONABLE doubt. Maybe a lack of physical evidence, but common sence dictates that he was guilty based on his actions prior to and after the incident.

[sana]

Originally posted by Puddles
Exactly. There was no REASONABLE doubt. Maybe a lack of physical evidence, but common sence dictates that he was guilty based on his actions prior to and after the incident.

common sense and speculation are not the same as reasonable doubt.

GUILTY BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT. do you really think this was proved?

i feel for the peterson family. not sure what my exact feelings are for the scumbag. his mother has had a very VERY hard life. but the jury took into consideration laci's mother anguish and pain - but were instructed by the judge that they could not take into consideration all the anguish and pain that jackie peterson has been through. i feel like she and her husband have been marginalized through this whole trial.

[Puddles]

Originally posted by sana
common sense and speculation are not the same as reasonable doubt.

GUILTY BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT. do you really think this was proved?

Granted I was not on the jury and I did not hear everything that went on, but in my heart, yes, I do believe he was guilty. I didn't think he was guilty at first either. It took a while for me to really believe he was.

You're not alone in your thinking. A lot of people agree with you. The last time I talked to Stromba about this he felt like you, not enough concrete evidence to convict him.

I just hope the outcome of this trial helps prevent another SOB from doing the same thing. This country is too lenient at times, protecting guilty people while the victims and their families have no recourse.