Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Scott Peterson: Guilty or Not?

The guy is guilty as hell and the prosecution doesnt have squat. I would convict him but without the" Hard "evidence it would have to be a very long sentence. No death. Everything this guy did says guilty. before,during and afterwards of Lacie missing.
 
Second juror in as many days has been dismissed.

This one was the jury foreman.

Link

The foreman of the jury in the Scott Peterson double-murder trial was dismissed Wednesday, a day after another juror was dismissed and deliberations were sent back to the drawing board.

Judge Alfred Delucchi brought in each juror and interviewed them one-by-one on Tuesday before deciding to dismiss Juror No. 7.

On Wednesday, the judge surprised court observers when he dismissed juror No. 5 only hours after the jury had resumed deliberations.

No explanation was given for his dismissal. This is the third juror to have been dismissed from the case.
Click to expand...
 
IndyGopher said:
I am completely sickened by each and every one of you who said "who cares" And for the person who implied that there was some socio-economic or nationalistic (I know you really meant racist, but you DO know that "latino" isn't a race, right?) reason why people are making a big deal out of this.. you make me doubly sick. You not only don't care that a woman and a child were murdered, you don't care because she wasn't the proper color, with the proper background to make it important.. EXACTLY what you are accusing the media of, by the way.
Click to expand...

not quite. i imagine that the reason a lot of people don't care is NOT because they don't care that a woman and a baby were murdered, it's because there are many other women/men/babies/children who were also murdered. i think there is no compelling reason to focus so much attention to this case as opposed to other murders that have taken place. in my opinion, this case is receiving tremendous media attention because the woman was pregnant, she was white and attractive and was from an affluent neighborhood. i find media's exploration of tabloid style sensationalism disguisting and tasteless and for those reasons, i don't care about this case.

strictly in my opinion, by paying attention to a case like this (same with jon benet case), you are implicity giving into the media's idea that crimes involving white people, attractive women, people in a better neighborhood, sports figures are somehow more important and significant (hence "worthy" of more media coverage) than those involving black and latino people, not so attractive women or people in urban areas. (all examples based on my generalization of the media's trend.)

instead of a case like this, i wish media would spend a little more time covering international affairs. (and sorry, iraq isn't the only international affair - it's almost a domestic affair for the americans since it was started by americans.)
 
To me this case is a glaring example of the difference between justice for the rich and justice for the rest of us. No, Peterson isn't rich but he's lucky. Having Gerragos for an attorney saved his life. Before Gerragos became involved with this case Peterson was in court in shackles and an orange jumpsuit. The prosecutor was talking about a 'slam dunk' case. Peterson was on the short track to the prison gurney (well as short as the track gets here in Ca.). But once a high-powered attorney took his case the playing field shifted dramatically. Suddenly the shackles and jumpsuit were 'predjudicial' to his client. All talk of a 'slam dunk' went out the door. Before Gerragos I would have given Peterson no more than a 10% chance of escaping the death penalty. Now I think it's only 50-50 that he will even be convicted and almost zero chance that he will face death. To me that smacks of the unfairness of our criminal justice system(s). One for the rich, and one for the rest of us.
 
IndyGopher said:
I am completely sickened by each and every one of you who said "who cares" And for the person who implied that there was some socio-economic or nationalistic (I know you really meant racist, but you DO know that "latino" isn't a race, right?) reason why people are making a big deal out of this.. you make me doubly sick. You not only don't care that a woman and a child were murdered, you don't care because she wasn't the proper color, with the proper background to make it important.. EXACTLY what you are accusing the media of, by the way.

Did he kill them? I don't know. However, he did admit to sleeping with another woman while his wife was pregnant, all the while claiming how much he wanted this baby, and loved his wife.. if you want an "I don't care" answer, I'll give you one. I don't care if he did it or not, he deserves a good old-fashioned stoning just for that.
Click to expand...

You're completely sickened? I assure you, however much you're sickened by other posts in this thread I am more sickened by yours.

You're prepared to sentence someone to death because he doesn't conform to your own personal moral standard?

I'm not sure what your field of speciality is, but you might want to consider a career as a fascist dictator.
 
The verdict is in?

Just heard on the radio that a verdict has been reached and they will be announcing it at 4:00 Eastern time this afternoon.
 
Lyle said:
Just heard on the radio that a verdict has been reached and they will be announcing it at 4:00 Eastern time this afternoon.
Click to expand...
MSNBC is reporting that he's been found guilty of first-degree murder in the death of his wife, and second-degree murder in the death of his unborn son.
 
well he was found guilty
so I guess it doessit matter what anyone thinks any more
the question now is

Death Penalty ?
or
Not ?
 
Happy Thanksgiving dinner...

when you're deciding whether to send somebody to their death. :(
 
I didn't hear the evidence so I trust the jury as the judge of the facts. Listened to his guilty 1st degree Lacie, 2nd degree Conner, and guilty Special Circumstances. It was still a shock to hear the result. I just can't imagine how anyone could take a human life his wife and that of his unborn son. He is a child of the evil one if he actually committed this crime. Now he is eligible for the death penalty. :(
 
Actually rather surprised, because it really seemed like the defense had stolen the show and made the prosecution look pretty dumb. Guess the circumstantial evidence must have been damning.
 
apple2991 said:
Who knows/cares?
Click to expand...

There are some people who care a great deal. If you don't care, that's fine (I don't care much myself), but that doesn't mean no one cares.
 
I trust the jury after hearing and judging the evidence. Just don't understand how any human could the the life of their wife and unborn son. So heinous. There is no punishment on Earth worthy enough for him in this case.

I pray that Lacie & Conner may now finally rest in peace. This whole thing must be devastating for both parents. :(
 
I'm sure that this was a very difficult decison for the jury to make. This is a decison that will be with them for the rest of their lives. In this case I think that it was the right decision. Hopefully now Lacie's parents, family and friends can find some peace. It would be best if the appeal process was done at a deliberative and timely process. Scott will not have an easy time in prison having murdered a woman and her unborn child. Chances are he will actually have it easier being segregated on death row.

Even with the trial over with, it will still be very sad. Holidays are always very difficult for families that have lost loved ones. This will be the third year without Lacie and Conner.
 
i just have to say this saddens me...

Mostly because the prosecution didn't prove beyond any reasonable doubt he was connected to the son. It's sad that his wife and unborn child were killed, but you can't let your emotions run wild when you might be sentencing to death someone who might not have done it.

Is there a probability of him being guilty? Yes. Is there a probability of him being innocent? Yes. To me, even if there was 99% of proof that he was guilty but still 1% of chances that he wasn't, then you just can't sentence that person to his own death.

It's ridiculous and a sad state of affairs on society and the justice system.

If you are a juror you must be consciously cold blooded enough to not let your own emotions and beliefs interfere with your verdict. You must be scientific, and these people were not. Photos of horrendous killings don't prove anything.

*end of rant* :(
a.
 
afonso said:
i just have to say this saddens me...

Mostly because the prosecution didn't prove beyond any reasonable doubt he was connected to the son. It's sad that his wife and unborn child were killed, but you can't let your emotions run wild when you might be sentencing to death someone who might not have done it.

Is there a probability of him being guilty? Yes. Is there a probability of him being innocent? Yes. To me, even if there was 99% of proof that he was guilty but still 1% of chances that he wasn't, then you just can't sentence that person to his own death.

It's ridiculous and a sad state of affairs on society and the justice system.

If you are a juror you must be consciously cold blooded enough to not let your own emotions and beliefs interfere with your verdict. You must be scientific, and these people were not. Photos of horrendous killings don't prove anything.
Click to expand...

I was just on a jury and we ended up not only being deadlocked, but being chided by the judge afterwards for not being able to settle on an obviously guilty verdict. The problem, the judge said, was that people are too influenced by television and the proliferation of shows like C.S.I., where the evidence is conclusive and overwhelming. In real life, this is not so and the function of the lawyers is not to prove a case beyond any reasonable doubt, but to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. Reasonable is the key word here. One's sense of reason should not be affected by whether the case is murder or theft, whether the penalty is jail time or death. 99% is more than reasonable. 90% is probably reasonable as well. Did he definitely do it? No one saw him, so we'll never know. What the jury rightly found was a great probability that he committed these murders, great enough to be beyond a reasonable doubt. It's a very tough decision to come to and these people have to live with it for the rest of their lives. They were there, in the court-room. They debated this for hours and you have no idea the depth of their discussions or what they picked up by being there in the first person. Their decision should be respected.
 
I understand your point.

I do not watch TV so my feelings are my own opinions not influenced by what I see in movies, trust me. My opinion is obviously biased for two reasons:

1. I only know what I read in newspapers.
2. I am against the death penalty.

Still, I can't help but feel this trial was too publicized and I can't help but think too that he was sentenced to death just because there was an unborn child involved.

Would it have been a hispanic guy killing a hispanic girl with an unborn child, I am positive media wouldn't care.

That's sad.

(No, I'm not hispanic).

:) a.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back