peterson GUILTY!!!~

[GODDESS6]

scott peterson was found guilty of 1st degree murder in the death of his wife laci & 2nd degree murder in the death of baby conner~ i have more to say on this subject but need 2 go back & watch more on the coverage tho i for 1 would like to say:

:angel: may you finally rest in peace laci & baby conner :angel: ~
:angel: may god bless you both!!! :angel: ~

blessed be~

[Alison]

Finally Yes. I though at one point it was going to be a hung jury.
Justice finally served.
I only Wish Canada wasn't so lax with thier criminals. You can get away with murder in this country.

[Merf]

Finally Yes. I though at one point it was going to be a hung jury.
Justice finally served.
I only Wish Canada wasn't so lax with thier criminals. You can get away with murder in this country.

You can here, too. Anyone remember OJ Simpson? :mad:

[GODDESS6]

You can here, too. Anyone remember OJ Simpson? :mad:

AMEN, honey!!! :mad: :( :mad: ~

blessed be~

[The Tower]

Glory Hallelujah!!! A man was convicted on a completely circumstantial case!!!

Y'all better hope that your children aren't in this same position.

The dude killed his wife, but the prosecution couldn't prove it with evidence. So, we all suffer- cuz juries will continue to not follow the rule of law and convict people on the basis of subjective shade instead of proven evidence.

The prosecution did NOT make it's argument. Anyone who believes so probably voted for Dubya.

[gldstwmn]

Glory Hallelujah!!! A man was convicted on a completely circumstantial case!!!

Y'all better hope that your children aren't in this same position.

The dude killed his wife, but the prosecution couldn't prove it with evidence. So, we all suffer- cuz juries will continue to not follow the rule of law and convict people on the basis of subjective shade instead of proven evidence.

The prosecution did NOT make it's argument. Anyone who believes so probably voted for Dubya.

Preach it! We don't even know how the woman died but Hallelujah! It's a miracle! The jury got too emotionally involved and convicted someone on no evidence. I also predict another miracle a comin' in that they will go ahead and finish the job..by giving him the death penalty.
The reaction outside the court and to Peterson's mother as she left the courtroom was disgusting. People cheering?
This case won't stand on appeal.

[Alison]

The prosecution did NOT make it's argument. Anyone who believes so probably voted for Dubya.

Enough already. This Dubya thing is getting a little old. By the way I'm not a big supporter of Bush.

[Kelly]

There was quite alot of circumstantial evidence, which can be better at times, than eyewitness or so called "direct" evidence. None of us were in the courtroom, so do we really know all that was presented? I agree, there was no smoking gun but to say the jury convicted only on their emotions when they are still gagged and we have NO idea what they discussed while deliberating, we are being a bit unfair to those 12 citizens. They had a tough case but the jury SAW and HEARD the evidence and made a decision, we did not.
That is our system. Geragos made alot of promises to those jurors that he did not follow through on.(yes, I KNOW he didnt have too) I am sure they had to wonder why he told them in his opening that he would exonerate Scott, he would show them WHO killed Laci and Connor. That is what he said and he called no witnesses to back up those claims. The whole case was a mess from the get go and if there are errors it will be addressed on appeal. As far as the jury goes and the appeal, the first one dismissed during deliberations was dismissed for misconduct, there will be NO issues there for an appeal. The foreman is another story, as I am not sure exactly what happened with him yet. There are rumours as to why he was dismissed but until I can read something or hear something official, it is really no use to speculate on whether that will be an appealable issue.

My opinion on the case changed from day to day. I do not think the prosecution did a great job presenting. I do not think Geragos did a great job defending, especially with all the theories he floated and his lack of following through on his promises to the jury. There were two pieces of evidence that I could not get past.
One..the fact that Laci was found wearing the same pants she was wearing the night before when she got her hair cut. Scott told the police she was dressed in another outfit when he saw her leave with the dog. That says to me that she never got undressed from the night before. We woman know we do not get up and put on dirty clothes on Christmas Eve.
Two...the fact that the bodies were located 90 miles from where Laci was supposedly abducted, coincidentally right where Scott places himself that day. To say someone abducted Laci and drove her up to the Bay to frame Scott is very far fetched and hard to believe. Why would anyone do that? Her body condition pretty much indicates she was weighted down, why if this so called adductor wanted to frame Scott, would he weigh down her body?
The Amber Frey tapes were horrible and the one thing of value I got out of them was the fact he told Amber he had "lost his wife and this would be his first holiday without her" three weeks before Laci went missing. For all of these things just to be coincidence, Scott would have to be the most unlucky guy in the world.

I did think the jury would Hang or decide to go with Second degree as a compromise. I am shocked that twelve people all felt there was no reasonable doubt.

[GODDESS6]

Glory Hallelujah!!! A man was convicted on a completely circumstantial case!!!

Y'all better hope that your children aren't in this same position.

The dude killed his wife, but the prosecution couldn't prove it with evidence. So, we all suffer- cuz juries will continue to not follow the rule of law and convict people on the basis of subjective shade instead of proven evidence.

The prosecution did NOT make it's argument. Anyone who believes so

probably voted for Dubya.

hate to pee in your wheaties but i didn't vote 4 bush & my comments on this trial have nothin' 2 do w/ who i voted 4!!!~ i did watch this case EVERYDAY!!!!!!!!!!!~ the circumstantial evidence was overwhelming,
1.there was only 18 mins from the time scott supposedly left & the neighbor finding her dog, so in 18 mins, laci cleaned up her exstensive mess (scott said she had a huge mess out making gingerbread) & go 2 the park & b abducted~
2.nothing was missing, it was 41* that day, nothing was missing from the house, no shoes, no jacket, her purse, cell phone & her jewelry ( all her friends & family said that laci NEVER left the house w/ out her expensive jewelry on especialy her wedding ring) the jewelry was all found on the dresser~
3. scott said in october to his mistress & others that he had "lost " his wife & this would b the 1st holidays w/ out her :shrug: ~
4. he admitted to being right where the bodies washed up~
5. all the lies he told 2 everyone about anything & everything, i wouldn't believe the bastard if his tongue came notorized!!!~
6. no 1 knew scott had bought this boat, not even his DADDY, scott & daddy were supossed to b so close no 1 could believe that scott wouldn't have told his DADDY about his big boat purchase~
7.tells 2 different stories about where he was the day of the dissappearance~
8.was found trying 2 get in2 mexico w/ all the things u would need while hididng out, oh yeah he also had a huge supply of viagra on him :shrug: ~
9. his defense was: a satanic cult did it or a band of homeless people~

no 1 should have treated scott's mother they way that they did while she left the courtroom, i do not approve of that, scott is still her son & she loves him, but death penalty or not, she will still get 2 see him, cali isn't like texas & carry out the death penalty everyday, he will spend quite a few yrs on deathrow, & if he gets life she can visit him weekly~ laci's mom however doesn't get that, her only hope is goin' 2 a cemetary 2 c her daughter & grandson~

this is just MY opinion!!!~ & i am not bashing any1 on their opinion on this, i just felt you r comment was kinda rude~

blessed be~

[dissention]

I'm not really familiar with the American legal system, nor this case, but how can someone recieve the death penalty without any evidence linking them to the crime? From the little I've heard (and I'm still at a loss as to why it's such big news) it reminds me of Lindy 'a dingo took my baby' Chamberlain. Haven't people learnt by now not to get emotionally involved in cases?

In the American legal system, a man can go into a town hall, kill a mayor and another elected official, then be found not guilty because his lawyer argued that a binge on Twinkies and junk food made him commit the crime, Lux. Our legal system is a joke and has been for the past 30 years.

As I've said, the prosecution did a marvelous job with circumstantial evidence, but they didn't prove their case. Geragos did a horrific job and gave the conviction to the prosecution wrapped in a pretty blue bow.

[SuzeQuze]

Say it sista. He did it, everyone knows he did it, and the bad guy is in jail. To say this compromises our whole legal system is just making a sweeping generalization based on one case. Based on the evidence below, what other conclusion is there? The right thing to do is to have the bad guy put away. Imagine this monster having gotten off? <shudders>

hate to pee in your wheaties but i didn't vote 4 bush & my comments on this trial have nothin' 2 do w/ who i voted 4!!!~ i did watch this case EVERYDAY!!!!!!!!!!!~ the circumstantial evidence was overwhelming,
1.there was only 18 mins from the time scott supposedly left & the neighbor finding her dog, so in 18 mins, laci cleaned up her exstensive mess (scott said she had a huge mess out making gingerbread) & go 2 the park & b abducted~
2.nothing was missing, it was 41* that day, nothing was missing from the house, no shoes, no jacket, her purse, cell phone & her jewelry ( all her friends & family said that laci NEVER left the house w/ out her expensive jewelry on especialy her wedding ring) the jewelry was all found on the dresser~
3. scott said in october to his mistress & others that he had "lost " his wife & this would b the 1st holidays w/ out her :shrug: ~
4. he admitted to being right where the bodies washed up~
5. all the lies he told 2 everyone about anything & everything, i wouldn't believe the bastard if his tongue came notorized!!!~
6. no 1 knew scott had bought this boat, not even his DADDY, scott & daddy were supossed to b so close no 1 could believe that scott wouldn't have told his DADDY about his big boat purchase~
7.tells 2 different stories about where he was the day of the dissappearance~
8.was found trying 2 get in2 mexico w/ all the things u would need while hididng out, oh yeah he also had a huge supply of viagra on him :shrug: ~
9. his defense was: a satanic cult did it or a band of homeless people~

no 1 should have treated scott's mother they way that they did while she left the courtroom, i do not approve of that, scott is still her son & she loves him, but death penalty or not, she will still get 2 see him, cali isn't like texas & carry out the death penalty everyday, he will spend quite a few yrs on deathrow, & if he gets life she can visit him weekly~ laci's mom however doesn't get that, her only hope is goin' 2 a cemetary 2 c her daughter & grandson~

this is just MY opinion!!!~ & i am not bashing any1 on their opinion on this, i just felt you r comment was kinda rude~

blessed be~

[The Tower]

Enough already. This Dubya thing is getting a little old. By the way I'm not a big supporter of Bush.

The "Dubya thing" will never get old.

hate to pee in your wheaties but i didn't vote 4 bush & my comments on this trial have nothin' 2 do w/ who i voted 4!!!

You didn't pee in my wheaties. If you notice, I said probably voted for Dubya.

no 1 should have treated scott's mother they way that they did while she left the courtroom, i do not approve of that, scott is still her son & she loves him, but death penalty or not, she will still get 2 see him, cali isn't like texas & carry out the death penalty everyday, he will spend quite a few yrs on deathrow, & if he gets life she can visit him weekly~ laci's mom however doesn't get that, her only hope is goin' 2 a cemetary 2 c her daughter & grandson

All of your "circumstantial" reasons only point to odd behavior or strange things happening based on testimony. None of them have any direct link to an identifiable person killing her.

You're right- Scott Peterson's mother is much better off than Laci Peterson's mother. She's a lucky woman. :rolleyes:

this is just MY opinion!!!~ & i am not bashing any1 on their opinion on this, i just felt you r comment was kinda rude

Of course this is your opinion- my rude comment was my opinion, too. However, I don't think my comment is as rude as potentially sending someone to death without a shred of physical evidence just because he is a loathesome individual.

Last time I looked, one can't get the death penalty for being an asshole. If that were the case, I would have been dead long, long ago.

Say it sista. He did it, everyone knows he did it, and the bad guy is in jail. To say this compromises our whole legal system is just making a sweeping generalization based on one case. Based on the evidence below, what other conclusion is there?

You're right. From now on, criminal cases will all be decided on the basis of whether or not "everyone knows he did it". This will save a lot of time and money and all the "bad guys" will be in jail (or dead) and we will all be safer for it. All of our judgements will be based on the idea that if we can't think up any other plausible conclusion the only conclusion is the one the prosecutor came up with- mainly because I can't think for myself and the prosecutors are usually always right.

[wondergirl9847]

In the American legal system, a man can go into a town hall, kill a mayor and another elected official, then be found not guilty because his lawyer argued that a binge on Twinkies and junk food made him commit the crime, Lux.

If that Twinkie defense were true, I'd have murdered someone long ago....LOL

[dissention]

If that Twinkie defense were true, I'd have murdered someone long ago....LOL

It worked once, dear. :laugh:

[gldstwmn]

The other big white elephant in the room here is how certain elements are going to spin the second degree murder conviction with respect to Roe V. Wade. What this jury also has done now is set a precedent by giving the unborn child "personhood." It's a slippery slope.
By the way, the justice system should work for everyone, not just people that you like.

[strandinthewind]

You can here, too. Anyone remember OJ Simpson? :mad:

While I think OJ probably did it (although the evid. did not IMO show that :shrug: ) - OJ had great lawyers and the prosec. screwed that case up. Havind said that, Prosecuting a case is not the easiest thing in the world.

[wondergirl9847]

It worked once, dear. :laugh:

*Writes out list of hits while shoveling in the Twinkies, Ding Dongs, HoHos, etc.*

:lol:

[Kelly]

I agree the decision is a slippery slope with respect to Roe. I have trouble understanding also how Scott could be guilty of first degree murder in the death of Laci but second degree in the death of Connor. Obviously killing Laci would kill Connor so I tend to think that was a compromise within the jury. If they believe Scott premeditated the death of his wife, how can they not believe he understood that would he would be killing Connor also?!? The whole case is a mess IMHO and the strongest ground for appeal in my opinion will be the Judges decision not to allow the defense their boat demonstration but allowing the prosecution to do a demonstration. That was a mistake.. I do wonder if the verdict will stand upon appeal...I tend think he will be granted a new trial....

I don't know if you guys mentioned anywhere the crowds reaction to the Peterson family leaving the courthouse on Friday. It make me sick literally. I feel sorry for Jackie and Lee Peterson, they lost a grandson, daughter in law and a son. The crowd heckling her and jeering and shouting things at her was a sad moment for humanity. I admire the Hacking family so much because they stood up for the right thing and did not side with Mark just because he was their son. Mark confessed however and I believe the Peterson's firmly believe that Scott is innocent. It is a shame that standing up and supporting your son is a reason to be mocked and jeered at in this country. Both families are in a never ending nightmare and this verdict will do nothing to end that.

[strandinthewind]

I agree the decision is a slippery slope with respect to Roe. I have trouble understanding also how Scott could be guilty of first degree murder in the death of Laci but second degree in the death of Connor. Obviously killing Laci would kill Connor so I tend to think that was a compromise within the jury. If they believe Scott premeditated the death of his wife, how can they not believe he understood that would he would be killing Connor also?!? The whole case is a mess IMHO and the strongest ground for appeal in my opinion will be the Judges decision not to allow the defense their boat demonstration but allowing the prosecution to do a demonstration. That was a mistake.. I do wonder if the verdict will stand upon appeal...I tend think he will be granted a new trial....

I don't know if you guys mentioned anywhere the crowds reaction to the Peterson family leaving the courthouse on Friday. It make me sick literally. I feel sorry for Jackie and Lee Peterson, they lost a grandson, daughter in law and a son. The crowd heckling her and jeering and shouting things at her was a sad moment for humanity. I admire the Hacking family so much because they stood up for the right thing and did not side with Mark just because he was their son. Mark confessed however and I believe the Peterson's firmly believe that Scott is innocent. It is a shame that standing up and supporting your son is a reason to be mocked and jeered at in this country. Both families are in a never ending nightmare and this verdict will do nothing to end that.

ITA and well said (as usual :cool: )

Also, legally speaking Roe has no application to this case. Roe said the state's interest in protecting the life of the fetus was outweighed by the mother's right to privacy only in the first trimester because after then the fetus was viable outside of the womb. After then, the state could place limits and outright prohibit abortion without violating the mother's right to privacy.

Food for thought! :cool:

[SuzeQuze]

I agree the decision is a slippery slope with respect to Roe. I have trouble understanding also how Scott could be guilty of first degree murder in the death of Laci but second degree in the death of Connor. Obviously killing Laci would kill Connor so I tend to think that was a compromise within the jury. If they believe Scott premeditated the death of his wife, how can they not believe he understood that would he would be killing Connor also?!? The whole case is a mess IMHO and the strongest ground for appeal in my opinion will be the Judges decision not to allow the defense their boat demonstration but allowing the prosecution to do a demonstration. That was a mistake.. I do wonder if the verdict will stand upon appeal...I tend think he will be granted a new trial....

I don't know if you guys mentioned anywhere the crowds reaction to the Peterson family leaving the courthouse on Friday. It make me sick literally. I feel sorry for Jackie and Lee Peterson, they lost a grandson, daughter in law and a son. The crowd heckling her and jeering and shouting things at her was a sad moment for humanity. I admire the Hacking family so much because they stood up for the right thing and did not side with Mark just because he was their son. Mark confessed however and I believe the Peterson's firmly believe that Scott is innocent. It is a shame that standing up and supporting your son is a reason to be mocked and jeered at in this country. Both families are in a never ending nightmare and this verdict will do nothing to end that.

No, I didn't see the crowd's reaction. That is awful, nothing like kicking someone when they're down. They should be ashamed of themselves.

[gldstwmn]

I agree the decision is a slippery slope with respect to Roe. I have trouble understanding also how Scott could be guilty of first degree murder in the death of Laci but second degree in the death of Connor. Obviously killing Laci would kill Connor so I tend to think that was a compromise within the jury. If they believe Scott premeditated the death of his wife, how can they not believe he understood that would he would be killing Connor also?!? The whole case is a mess IMHO and the strongest ground for appeal in my opinion will be the Judges decision not to allow the defense their boat demonstration but allowing the prosecution to do a demonstration. That was a mistake.. I do wonder if the verdict will stand upon appeal...I tend think he will be granted a new trial....

I don't know if you guys mentioned anywhere the crowds reaction to the Peterson family leaving the courthouse on Friday. It make me sick literally. I feel sorry for Jackie and Lee Peterson, they lost a grandson, daughter in law and a son. The crowd heckling her and jeering and shouting things at her was a sad moment for humanity. I admire the Hacking family so much because they stood up for the right thing and did not side with Mark just because he was their son. Mark confessed however and I believe the Peterson's firmly believe that Scott is innocent. It is a shame that standing up and supporting your son is a reason to be mocked and jeered at in this country. Both families are in a never ending nightmare and this verdict will do nothing to end that.

I did mention it and I was horrifed by what I saw outside that courthouse. Nobody "wins" here. That crowd looked like they were at some sporting event.

[gldstwmn]

ITA and well said (as usual :cool: )

Also, legally speaking Roe has no application to this case. Roe said the state's interest in protecting the life of the fetus was outweighed by the mother's right to privacy only in the first trimester because after then the fetus was viable outside of the womb. After then, the state could place limits and outright prohibit abortion without violating the mother's right to privacy.



Take off the blinders. :distress: You know who and what we're dealing with here. Check out "Connor's Law." I'm assuming you're unaware of it.

[strandinthewind]

Take off the blinders. :distress: You know who and what we're dealing with here. Check out "Connor's Law." I'm assuming you're unaware of it.

I know that. I am just saying that this case does not violate Roe in the slightest. Will it be used to go into the first trimester. Who knows. I am sure the far religious right will try and do so.

Interstingly and in the abstract, it is a woman's right to choose that is the issue, then the state could call it murder if someone else terminates the pregnancy at any time via murder. The Court never said it was not a life during the first trimester - they actually dodged that exact question to wit:
______________________________________________________________

In view of all this, we do not agree that, by adopting one theory of life, Texas may override the rights of the pregnant woman that are at stake. We repeat, however, that the State does have an important and legitimate interest in preserving and protecting the health of the pregnant woman, whether she be a resident of the State or a nonresident who seeks medical consultation and treatment there, and that it has still another important and legitimate interest in protecting the potentiality of human life. These interests are separate and distinct. Each grows in substantiality as the woman approaches term and, at a point during pregnancy, each becomes "compelling."

With respect to the State's important and legitimate interest in the health of the mother, the "compelling" point, in the light of present medical knowledge, is at approximately the end of the first trimester. This is so because of the now-established medical fact, referred to above at 149, that until the end of the first trimester mortality in abortion may be less than mortality in normal childbirth. It follows that, from and after this point, a State may regulate the abortion procedure to the extent that the regulation reasonably relates to the preservation and protection of maternal health. Examples of permissible state regulation in this area are requirements as to the qualifications of the person who is to perform the abortion; as to the licensure of that person; as to the facility in which the procedure is to be performed, that is, whether it must be a hospital or may be a clinic or some other place of less-than-hospital status; as to the licensing of the facility; and the like.


This means, on the other hand, that, for the period of pregnancy prior to this "compelling" point, the attending physician, in consultation with his patient, is free to determine, without regulation by the State, that, in his medical judgment, the patient's pregnancy should be terminated. If that decision is reached, the judgment may be effectuated by an abortion free of interference by the State.

With respect to the State's important and legitimate interest in potential life, the "compelling" point is at viability. This is so because the fetus then presumably has the capability of meaningful life outside the mother's womb. State regulation protective of fetal life after viability thus has both logical and biological justifications. If the State is interested in protecting fetal life after viability, it may go so far as to proscribe abortion during that period, except when it is necessary to preserve the life or health of the mother.

Measured against these standards, Art. 1196 of the Texas Penal Code, in restricting legal abortions to those "procured or attempted by medical advice for the purpose of saving the life of the mother," sweeps too broadly. The statute makes no distinction between abortions performed early in pregnancy and those performed later, and it limits to a single reason, "saving" the mother's life, the legal justification for the procedure. The statute, therefore, cannot survive the constitutional attack made upon it here.

http://www.tourolaw.edu/patch/Roe/
_____________________________________________________________

So, the state could legally charge someone with murder of a fetus and not violate Roe. In other words, all the Court protected in Roe was the right to privacy of the mother, it never flat out says in the first trimester the fetus is not a life nor does it give any right to provacy to a murderer as in the Peterson case :shrug:

Note: I am not saying the far religious right will not misuse this. I am just saying that the law does not and cannot violate Roe in reality or in spirit.