The jury in the Scott Perterson trial has just sentenced him to death for the murder of his wife.
How about that..

Just saw that on Court TV.

surprised...thought they'd give him life

I'm quite shocked. I hope the judge doesn't listen to that.

I'm not surprised they did but I couldn't (if I were a juror) give it to him considering the evidence presented at trial, which didn't include any hard evidence.

this makes me sad, i dont think anyone deseres the death penalty. but i am not an eye for an eye type of person. scott also has a family :(

I think a LOT of interesting information will now come out since the gag order has been lifted. You can be sure that this is not over by any stretch. Either way, my thoughts are with Scott's family right now.

The judge can overrule the jury and sentence him to "life". In a circumstantial case, I would not have voted for the death penalty.

They just said the judge can reduce it to life without, its only a recommendation.

Wow...this is sad, but I can't say that I am surprised....my thoughts are with Scott and his family.

wow, kind of shocking, wonder if he'll get it.

hmm...this whole story is sad. I had to stop watching it. I wonder what is going to happen....

i am confused, did he actually get sentanced to death?? or not??

The jury just recommended that he be put to death. The judge can reverse that and make it life in prison, if he wants. However, he CANNOT reverse a life in prison recommendation and make it death.

Honestly, I personally think the man deserved it. I'm glad he got what he got, though I'm sure he will appeal it.

I doubt very seriously he is going to do that, from what they say about this Judge.

That's sad. :( I'll keep him and his family in my thoughts.

Phil

I missed the coverage on this case...who spoke on Scott's behalf?

I caught bits and pieces, but I did not follow it closely.

Wow...this is sad, but I can't say that I am surprised....my thoughts are with Scott and his family.
My thoughts are with the Peterson family, they did, afterall lose a grandchild, a daughter in law and now a son. I do not, however, feel any sympathy for Scott Peterson himself. My thoughts will definitely go out to the Peterson family.

Wow...this is sad, but I can't say that I am surprised....my thoughts are with Scott and his family.
Let's not forget Laci and her family,

Let's not forget Laci and her family,
Most definitely not. I think everyone loses here and it is a sad situation no matter what has and will happen.

Scott Definitely Got What He Deserves!!!!!!!!

:( Very sad that in this century we still do this barbaric act.... Also sad that in a case with no hard evidence and only assumptions or circumstantial evidence they did this... The clapping outside when they announced the decision reminded me of things I read in History books of when they used to stone people or hang them in public view and people took a picnic lunch with their family to view it.... Someday History will view what we do as barbaric and inhumane. Sick is what we are.....

Deb

I also don't really believe in the death penalty BUT in this case I do think he is guilty and I do hope he gets what he deserves! My prayers and thoughts are with the Laci family, they did not deserve to lose there daughter and there grandson!

They are interviewing 3 of the jurors right now.

To convict a man based on circumstancial evidence is abhorrent. To convict a man to death based on circumstancial evidence is an abomination.

Please keep in mind that Scott's family may be members here at PTO one day.

My thoughts are with the Peterson family, they did, afterall lose a grandchild, a daughter in law and now a son. I do not, however, feel any sympathy for Scott Peterson himself. My thoughts will definitely go out to the Peterson family.
I agree with you "sweetestsin7". I do not feel any sympathy for Scott either.

From what I heard on the radio, there have only been 10 deaths in CA since the death penality was reinstated in 1978. There are about 630 people waiting to be put to death in CA. That would mean that after all Scott's appeals have been exhausted, it could be another 27 years before he would be put to death.

I think that is 27 years that Laci won't be here with her family and be around to raise her baby and that their precious little baby boy will never grow up to be 27 years old man. So sad! :(

WARNING...VERY DESCRIPTIVE PART...
They said this is what Laci's mom (Sharon) told the juror's in the penalty part...(not verbatim) all that was left of Laci was her torso and when they put the baby and her in the same coffin, Sharon just cried and cried because Laci didn't have her arms to hold her baby boy. :( :( :( :(

Article in South African Paper today 14 th December - I am 9 hrs ahead of time

Jury says wife killer should die

Peterson said he was away when his wife disappeared
A California jury has recommended that a man convicted of murdering his wife and unborn son should be executed.
Scott Peterson, 32, reported his wife Laci missing on Christmas Eve, 2002. She was eight months pregnant.

Her headless and limbless body, and the decomposed remains of her foetus, were later found washed up on a San Francisco Bay beach in April 2003.

The judge could still opt to give Peterson life in prison when he passes sentence on 25 February.

In November, Peterson was convicted of first-degree murder for killing his wife and second-degree murder for the death of his unborn child.

'Dumped overboard'

The former fertiliser salesman said he had been out fishing when his wife disappeared.

Prosecutors told the court he had strangled or smothered Laci, 27, and dumped her weighted body over the side of his fishing boat.


"He wants to live the rich, successful, freewheeling bachelor life," Mr Distaso said.


Laci Peterson was eight months pregnant when she disappeared
"He didn't want to be tied to this kid the rest of his life. He didn't want to be tied to Laci for the rest of his life."

Mr Distaso argued that he killed his wife for money and to be with his mistress, Amber Frey.

Defence lawyers argued that Mrs Peterson was abducted by strangers who murdered her. They said the prosecution's case was built on circumstantial evidence.

The five-month trial attracted widespread media attention and fuelled the abortion issue because of the debate over whether Peterson could be charged for the murder of a technically unborn child.

I feel very badly for Scott's Mother and Father but its no where near as badly as I feel for Laci's Family.

I feel Scott deserves the death penalty too. He was convicted of murdering his CHILD! If it was just her, I may feel alot differently but he crossed a BIG line with me personally and for that, I don't want to see him spend the next decade and a half appealing this in a nice cushy prison cell in a nice new mainlined facility.

I don't want to see him spend the next decade and a half appealing this in a nice cushy prison cell in a nice new mainlined facility.

OH gosh, where have you seen there are nice cushy prison cells ?????

Phil

My opinon on the death penaly is always the same. Whatever the circumstances the death penalty is a brutal and uncivilised response.
It is wrong under all circumstances in mind opinion...and incidentally, not allowing the death penalty is a prequisite for being a member of the European Community!

What would be worse-to die or to spend the next fifty years in a prison cell with nothing to do but think about what you did to get there? JMO.

-Although the evidence was only circumstancial, I too believe he did it and should be punished, but that is based in emotion as a mother and wife, not fact. A jury is to convict on solid evidence and fact, not emotion.

This is very sad. I think too that he has to pay for what he has done. But killing him is not the solution. NO ONE deserve the death penalty.

No one has the right to take another person's life. A lethal injection is murder just the same as a bullet in the head. This is a barbaric practice, and leaves us in the middle ages mentally. Who are we to play God?

impoohbearsgirl
You may feel Scott deserves the death penalty. That is your right and I respect it. However, no civilised state or country has the right to intentionally
take a life in the name of justice. Its barbaric! There is a difference between
an individuals opinion and justice!

I'll keep my opinions on the crime and the trial to myself; the media circus surrounding the entire situation has been in the poorest of taste. That being said...I feel that if the death sentence stands, justice has been served.

My heart goes out to BOTH of the families and to Scott, under circumstantial evidence I just don't understand how there cannot be some kind of doubt..I could not sentence anyone to death unless I knew for certain, then it would have to be very hard to do.
Personally, I think life in prison is cruel enough when you just are not sure what took place.

My heart goes out to Scott and the Peterson family. I don't think that the death penalty should even be an option in a case in which someone was convicted solely on circumstantial evidence.

And also Laci's family. Both sides lose in this situation.

I was following this case, and I have to say, my opinion is the evidence presented was very circumstantial. I cant understand while there has been reasonable doubt, that the death penalty could of been handed down for his sentence. I think the media hype has really influenced this case as well.
My thoughts go out to the Laci's family, and the Peterson family. This is a time of year to be rejoicing, and that has been taken away from both families. I personally hate hearing about anybody getting the death penalty.

It is such a sad tragedy for everyone involved. My prayers and thoughts go out to both of the families. I do not believe in the death penalty and I don't believe there was enough evidence to convict him. Further more as far as Amber, I think it's horrible that she is selling a book and profiting of this tragedy! She should let the money go to a charity or something, not to herself. What could she really say about it anyway, she dated him for 3 weeks!!


Michelle Z.

I pray for both of the familys. They are the ones who will suffer a lifetime of hell.

We are all entitled to our own opinions, And mine is the same as many others, however--isn't there an ammendment in the constitution that forbids cruel and unusual punishment??? Just wondering!!! Doesn't the DP seem cruel and unusual??? Just a couple of questions I had is all!! I know my answers, and some of the rest of you would say as I do!! But, thougth I would throw it out there!!!!

I feel sorry for everyone involved.. I am on the fence about the death penalty but definitely don't think anyone should get the death penalty only based on circumstantial evidence.. Geez.. the Green River Killer didn't even get the death penalty and he admitted to his murders...

I do not believe in the death penalty. What is interesting is OJ can walk free for domestic violence but Scott Peterson gets death for domestic violence. I am glad that this is being taken seriously finally (domestic violence) but neither trial ended with justice in my opinion.

I simply cannot fathom the idea that Scott was sentenced to die based on the loose circumstantial evidence that he was convicted on. It just baffles me. As far as I know, there was never a shred of physical evidence tying him directly to the crime. What if California murders him, then down the road finds out he didn't do it? I think the media is to blame for the conviction AND the sentence. They made him look guilty, so everyone believed he was. Just because he got caught fooling around. Lots of men fool around on their wives and don't murder them.

My heart goes out to Laci's family and Scotts family, but I cannot say I feel sorry for him, even with "circumstantial evidence" The guy was running out of the country when they arrested him, with his hair dyed and a passport.

I am not suprised by this verdict even though I am not *for* the Death of anything or anyone! Either way, his life is over. And Laci's life is gone and the babies life too. The loss of life here is horrible, sadly it was before his sentencing.

I am glad that they want him to get Death, I am sorry as a mother I can't feel sorry for Scott Peterson for murdering his pregnant wife and unborn child. He deserves to get death because he killed his own fresh and blood so ain't no tears for him here!!

My thoughts and prayers to both families... I will not share my personal opinion regarding the jurys suggested sentance. However, based upon CA's history on putting people to death, I find it highly likely that Scott would die or commit suicide before he would face death by injection (or however they do it). Seeing as the appeal process takes so long and what not. Hes screwed either way, since hes so 'high profile' he will most likely be segregated from the general prison population; look what happened to Jeffrey Dahmer, what he did to all those people...he was let loose in the general population, and another inmate killed HIM. Either way the judge goes, hes going to pay his debt to society.

I have to agree here that even though I think he killed her and the baby, the evidence is circumstational at best. UNLESS there is more to the story then the public has heard. I have to say that there are way too many out there that deserved the death penalty for sure, and they ended up getting life oe even being acquitted. So I was very surprosed by the jurors. I think in my opinion that the judge will probably not sentence him to death due to all of the media hoopla. I think he will probably get life. No matter what I think of Scott Peterson personally, I do feel very badly for both families. Losing a child is never easy, whether its by murder, natural causes or incarceration. Everyone in this situation loses. Its really sad.

It is very hard for me to believe much of what I read because I know first hand the sensationalism that occurs in cases. With that in mind I am surprised how quickly we all respond as if we believe we know the exact truth of what occured. IMO I will never believe the death penalty is justice, we just do not have the right to take a life regardless of the circumstances. This decision based on what many are calling circumstantial evidence is just another example of our mercurical judicial system.

Although Scott came across as a slimeball, I don't think he should get the death penalty. I think everybody hated him for his personality. There is a good chance that Scott killed his family but there is a chance he did not.
Last week I heard that a death sentence means an automatic appeal. I agree with another poster who said we will be hearing about Scott P for a long time.

My prayers and thoughts go out to all the family and friends involved in this. I'm not going to state my opinion on here, but court TV did say that if the death penalty stands, he most likely will die of old age before he gets put to death. They stated there are like 635 <approximately> in line ahead of him on death row. Its very unlikely he will ever see the electric chair or whatever it is. In Michigan we dont have the DP so I'm not too familiar on how they do it. Regardless, Laci and her son suffered a horrible, horrible death and didnt deserve to die.

No sympathy for him here.

The death penalty is never justice, only vengence. Only a perfect God can deal with vengence. Only a perfect God can forgive those people who cheered for death for a person they did not even know. What a strange country, what strange times we live in.

I have no sympathy for Scott at all. I think he's gotten what he deserves. I think he'll die either way no matter if he's sentenced to life or if he sits in prison for the rest of forever. I'd be real surprised if they did put him in gen pop. I don't think he should be able to live the luxurious life in prison either. What goes around comes around. I truly believe he killed Laci and her son. From what I've seen he's never shown emotion and if you're not guilty why in the hell would you change your appearance and try to leave the country? When you lose someone you love, you cry, you show emotion. He's not shown any remorse. As a mother and as a wife, I think he deserves to rot in hell.

I don't want to see him spend the next decade and a half appealing this in a nice cushy prison cell in a nice new mainlined facility.

Can I order up one of those "cushy" cells for my loved ones? None of them killed anyone.

*ugh* I had to stop following this case...it was driving me nuts !! It seemed to me that the media and public had found him guilty far before the trial even ended. It is a serious tragedy...my heart goes out to Laci's family...this is a loss they will never overcome.

I am strongly against the death penalty...and I can't believe the jury recommended he be given death!! I hope there is more to the story than what I have read to "justify" the jury's choice. I mean if it were me....and all my strong convictions against the death penalty aside....I just don't think I could have given him the death penalty with a clear conscious based on the evidence I have read about.

Oh and to clarify something that was said...a life without parole sentence can be overturned...and become the death penalty!!! How do I know ? Because I have a friend this happened to in California. He was sentenced to life without parole and the prosecutor went after him AGAIN and he was re-sentenced and given the death penalty !!! IT CAN HAPPEN :(

I, too, found it very difficult to believe the jury had recommended the death penalty. I am very much against it. However, these were very capable people, who watched Scott for the entire duration of the trial....as he laughed at jokes made by the defense, grimiced at comments, and showed no remorse or sorrow whatsoever. I'm sure it was very emotional for them, and they must have felt, as a matter of conscience amd social responsibility, to recommend imposing the worst punishment available under the law.

By the time that the State of california gets around to excuting Scott Peterson,
chances are he will have already died in prison of natural causes or as the news
said today committed suicide. California is not like Texas. I don't understand the
commotion of the death penalty as it is not enforced here in Ca. The best punishment that the Judge could give Peterson is a sentence to Death Row at
San Quentin, there he will be protected by others who are otherwise in the
General Population. Also he will have a glimpse of the Bay where he dumped his
wife's body and the baby Conner. He so gets exactly what he deserves. I see
from the news that he didn't have his cocky attitude look on his face, showed no emotion either. God have mercy on his soul, if he has one. And God Bless
his father mother and siblings for the torture that they have had to endure from
the press and the nation for the horrible acts he did against another. At leastnow Laci's parents hopefully will find some closure to this sadness. And the
rest of the nation can close this chapter and allow both families to grieve privately.

Fields of Gold ~ time and time again I have seen you post this idea that life without parole and the death penalty are the same thing...that what's the difference because in California they are slow to execute...

I can assure you that the two are quite different !!! The conditions for starters...a death row inmate spends 24/7 alone in his cell with the exception of a few 5 minute showers and rec time a few times a week. They are not allowed to get an education nor have employment. The place is a total zoo and "incidents" between inmates occur on a regular basis. This idea that he will be "protected" by being on death row is false. I can think of one man who is on death row at SQ who is there for crimes against children. He is in protective custody forever...he is not safe !!! There is the same hierarchy on death row that there is in the mainline population...

I am not sure how other inmates will treat Scott Peterson but I'm sure the fact that his case is high profile will not work in his favor.

The torment of rotting away on death row and awaiting your execution is a far cry from spending out your years on mainline. Each has a complete set of different issues...neither is easy !!! But I can assure you that anyone with a loved one or friend on death row would sleep easier at night (in California or not) that their sentence was reduced to life without parole !!!! I know I would.

:confused: I know this has been quite a difficult and VERY emotionally charged case, considering the terrible way Laci and her baby died (I have been following this case too, for some time now) but I have to also agree with Fed-X and say the disturbing part of this all is that NO hard evidence came to light.......so life would have been a more balanced verdict. Execution never solves anything anyway......and in this case it seems that it is more a case of vengeance - because of the lack of real evidence.
This makes me sad for both of these families - it is a real tragedy, from being so close and happy to come to this.....there is no winner in this.

I know people say there was no hard evidence, but I watched almost the entire play by play action, and I am convinced he did it. I think any man who kills those he is supposed to protect should get the death penalty. He is a cold man. If he was innocent, why didn't he testify?

Honestly, I personally think the man deserved it. I'm glad he got what he got, though I'm sure he will appeal it.

I just don't believe in the Death Penalty because like I said there are no winners, and it does not bring closure or the victims back. He should definitely pay - by spending his life in prison - that is not a way to live either and by doing what he did, if he did it, then he has given up his right to free life and must pay the consequence through imprisonment. It won't be like he has gotten away with it....

acpcpa
If he was innocent, why didn't he testify?

Most people sentenced to death row arent allowed to testify, for reasons that there defense dont allow them to, or some other reasons. The majority of people on death row never were allowed to testify at there own trial. It may not be that Peterson didnt want to testify, but more so, that he took advice from his legal team not to testify.

IceblueSparkles
I can assure you that anyone with a loved one or friend on death row would sleep easier at night (in California or not) that their sentence was reduced to life without parole !!!! I know I would.

I have to agree with you there totally!!! I would so much prefer to know that he didnt have that hanging over his head. Every appeal they have, you just sit and hope, that the judge will say, lets commute this sentence to life. If that was to happen, thats a huge victory for loved ones and there family. Someone I deeply care about has a new sentencing trial, and if the judge gives him life over death, with knowing him, and the fight he has endured on death row, I will so happy, and so will his family.

J.J
I just don't believe in the Death Penalty because like I said there are no winners, and it does not bring closure or the victims back

So true!!!

He will be formally sentenced in January

My heart hurts for both family's!! I hope they all find peace somehow.

December 14, 2004

Jury Says Scott Peterson Should Die for Murder

By DEAN E. MURPHY

REDWOOD CITY, Calif., Dec. 13 - After three days of deliberations and nearly two years of a nationwide obsession with the story of a young fertilizer salesman and his pretty and pregnant wife, the jury in the double-murder trial of Scott Peterson determined on Monday that he should be put to death.

Judge Alfred A. Delucchi, who under California law will formally sentence Mr. Peterson, 32, for killing his wife, Laci, 27, and the fetus, said he would take up the matter at a hearing on Feb. 25.

At the same hearing, the judge will consider motions from Mr. Peterson's lawyers for a new trial and to reduce the penalty to life in prison without the possibility of parole. The judge is required by law to consider the lesser sentence, but his praise for the jury on Monday made that seem unlikely.

"This is the way you saw it, and this is the way it is," Judge Delucchi said, his voice cracking with emotion as he addressed the six men and six women of the jury. He added, "I just can't believe how well you have performed."

After the jurors were dismissed, a spokesman for Laci Peterson's family said Mr. Peterson "got what he deserved."

"What a nightmare," said the spokesman, Ron Grantski, who is commonly described as Laci Peterson's stepfather. "It hasn't changed. It's still a nightmare. It should never have happened."

On Friday, only six jurors said they favored a death sentence, the jury foreman said at a news conference afterward. But after a weekend with the jurors sequestered in a hotel, the decision fell into place on Monday morning, when the foreman requested several pieces of evidence, including autopsy photographs of Laci Peterson and her fetus. Her body was found in San Francisco Bay without limbs or a head, and the fetus - which washed ashore separately - was described by prosecutors as appearing like "trash."

"It was very important for me to see that, to be sure of my decision," the foreman, Steve Cardosi, a fireman and paramedic, said of the photographs. "We all passed them around and we looked at them."

Mr. Peterson, who wept on several occasions during the eight-day penalty phase of his trial, reacted stoically to the reading of the verdict. His parents, Lee and Jackie Peterson, and his half-sister, Janey Peterson, all looked ashen. Seated directly behind Mr. Peterson, they listened in silence and showed no emotion beyond the worry that has burdened them throughout the trial.

Across the courtroom, Laci Peterson's mother, Sharon Rocha, and her companion, Mr. Grantski, as well as Laci Peterson's brother, Brent Rocha, and half-sister, Amy Rocha, were equally subdued, remaining quietly in their seats well after the jury had been dismissed.

Moments before the jury entered the courtroom, Mr. Peterson's lead lawyer, Mark Geragos, crouched in the aisle and spoke in a hushed voice with the Peterson family, his expression somber. Later, speaking briefly outside the courtroom on the Petersons' behalf, Mr. Geragos said the family was disappointed and would appeal, which is automatic in death-sentence cases in California.

"I hope you can understand that it's a very difficult time, and that's all I've got to say," Mr. Geragos said.

With the jury's decision, Mr. Peterson is set to join California's death row at San Quentin, the largest in the country, where 641 inmates await execution. Until he is formally sentenced, he will remain in Redwood City at the Maguire Correctional Facility, where he has lived alone in a cell in 3B West, a special unit for prisoners in protective custody. As has been the case since his arrival at the jail in January, he will be allowed one-hour visits twice a week.

The penalty verdict brings closer to an end, at least until the appeals are heard, one of the most talked-about criminal cases in recent American history. The trial managed to sustain intense media interest, particularly on cable television talk shows, even though cameras were not allowed in the courtroom and testimony in the guilt and penalty phases, often dry and tedious, extended over a six-month period.

That Mr. Geragos, a Los Angeles lawyer known for his celebrity clients and media savvy, joined the spectacle on Mr. Peterson's behalf made the case especially irresistible for television's armchair legal analysts. Before taking on Mr. Peterson as a client, Mr. Geragos had described the circumstantial evidence against him as "damning" during a television appearance.

More than 850 people were issued media credentials for the trial, and on Monday the regular throng of journalists was joined by dozens of television "bookers," who sought to schedule television appearances by jurors, family members and other key players. Because of the many onlookers from the public outside the courtroom, some television personalities were accompanied on Monday by bodyguards.

Judge Delucchi, with a record of death-penalty trials, is retired but took over the case when it was moved from Modesto, Calif., a farming town where the Petersons lived, to this San Francisco suburb about 70 miles away.

Mr. Peterson's lawyers had argued that it was impossible for him to receive a fair trial in Modesto, where public opinion turned against him almost from the day his wife was reported missing on Dec. 24, 2002. The hostility worsened when he acknowledged an extramarital affair with Amber Frey, a massage therapist from Fresno, that had begun in the weeks leading up to Laci Peterson's disappearance.

Ms. Frey cooperated with the authorities once she learned Mr. Peterson was married and his wife had disappeared, providing some of the most compelling testimony against Mr. Peterson during the trial.

Last Thursday, in urging the jurors to deliver a death sentence, prosecutors replayed some of the taped telephone conversations between Ms. Frey and Mr. Peterson, in which Mr. Peterson could be heard romancing - and lying to - Ms. Frey while hundreds of volunteers in Modesto searched for his wife.

Three jurors who spoke with journalists after the proceedings on Monday said Ms. Frey had helped them make up their minds. One, Greg Beratlis, described her testimony as "a big piece of the puzzle."

"There are a lot of victims in this," Mr. Beratlis said. "A lot of people were deceived. And that includes his family."

After Mr. Peterson was convicted on Nov. 12 of first-degree murder in the death of his wife and second-degree murder in the death of the fetus - and big crowds celebrated the verdicts outside the courthouse here - his lawyers insisted that a fair hearing in the penalty phase was not possible in Redwood City.

They were unsuccessful, however, in legal efforts, including a petition to the California Supreme Court, to move the penalty phase to Los Angeles, where they believed it would be easier to find jurors who had not been influenced by the media coverage.

Mr. Beratlis and the other jurors said they resented the suggestion that they had reached their verdicts because of public pressure.

"I am going to be O.K. with it," said one juror, Richelle Nice, an unemployed mother of four. "It is a difficult decision, but I know I made the right decision."

Carolyn Marshall contributed reporting from Redwood City for this article.

The Person That Was Suppose To Protect Lacy And Conner Is The One Who Took Their Lives......how Can Anyone Feel Sympathy For This Man ? I Personally Feel He Should Rot In Prison...all Of Our Men Are In There Missing And Loving Their Wives And Girfriends And Scott Peterson Murders His Loving Wife..the Only Ones I Feel Any Thing For On This Case Are The Parents

I've never approved of the death penalty. Murder is murder, no matter who it is and two wrongs don't make a right! That being said, although he never confessed, all evidence points to his guilt and I feel he did kill his wife and son. He has mental problems, that's for sure. The judge can rule for life in prison if he wants to when they have the hearing on Feb 25th. However, Scott won't have the same privileges as the other guys due to the fact that they'll have to keep him segregated and well guarded. He has already had death threats and other guys call him 'baby killer' and other such things.

Keep his family and the Rocha family in your prayers. Scott will never know how many people's lives were forever affected by what he did. They also suffer and will continue to suffer.

I know just very little about this case, just was reading a few newspaper articles. So I do not have a real opinion if he is guilty or not. But I know for sure that the Death Penalty is not the right way! I´m absolutely against it and I wish people in the US would finally realize that!

Someone who kills a person is sentenced to Death because he/she has to be punished for the horrible crime but when the State kills someone it is simply called justice and no one cares..., where is the logic there? Killing a person is wrong no matter who does it, but the Justice system gets away with it, I will never understand it...

It Is Wrong To Kill Anyone. Its Wrong For Me To Do It, Its Wrong For You To Do It, Its Wrong For The State To Do It!!!!!

So many of you spoke my feelings.
I don't believe in the death penalty-I think sitting the rest of your natural life in a prison cell is fair punishment- think of the things that could possibly happen to him in there. What makes me angry about the whole thing--Baby Connor never even had a chance. Scott as his father was to protect him and nuture him-instead- he took his life. God will judge him properly. I know if my family were missing-I WOULD BE OUT OF MY EVER LOVING MIND-day in and day out I would be searching-he did next to nothing--at the candlelight vigil-he spent time on the phone with his mistress????????
I believe is as guilty as can be--like I said-God will sort this out with him in the end.
My thoughts and prayers are with BOTH familys. Everyone loses.

My thoughts and prayers go out to both families. I don't agree with the death penalty especially considering a person is convicted strictly on circumstantial evidence. In my opinion all that was proved in court was this guy was a cold, calculating S.O.B that doesn't make a person a murderer. Murder is not the answer!!!

i have read this whole thread and have seen many different veiws and opinions. personally i feel absolutly sick for scott's family. they lost their son. i have a son and cannot even fathom losing him to the state. it would be no ones right to take his life but Gods. Regardless of what he has done, he will have to face Him in the end and God will decide what is right or wrong. not a human jury. i dont think scott should have gotten off, but i think it is extremely sad that they would have put him to death. that is just not right in my opnion. when are we going to stop this?

This is how I feel, I dont believe in the death penalty, no matter what! I do honestly believe that the jury came to their conclusion based on the media and the simply fact that it was so well publicised (sp)!

I hope that the judge will just give him life, yes if he did do it it is very wrong, but he still has a family that had nothing to do with it, and to put him to death with out hard core evidence is to me pure MURDER!!!!

But thats my opinion!

Wow!!! I just read this whole thread and I have to say I am a little disappionted, This is MY OPINION: You cant be for the DP in certain circumstances and against it for others. You are either for it or against it! IT IS WRONG TO KILL!!! No matter who you are... Furthermore what makes you all experts in this case? What gives you the right to find him guitly!?! Because you have watched every epsiode of court TV? Woo hoo-let me tell you all they show you what they want to and thats it!!! My brother is in jail for murder and even the local station here didn't bother with the facts!! Unless you were there which none of us were we have no idea what really happen... I dont know if he is guitly or not and I dont care... He will have to deal with that himself, who am I to judge or even speculate?-ask yourself that!

I know that death can be overturned in favor of life w/o parole, but I did not think that life w/o parole could be overturned in favor of death??!!

I am quite shocked that a jury didnt stay hung so that he could be tried again. Pls dont tar and feather me but for most of the time Nick has been in prison I have advocated for the innocent. I do not think they had a heap of evidence against Peterson, especially enough to sentence him to death. All evidence was circumstantial. I do believe the a**hole is a scum bag, and I do think he probably killed his wife. But it is the responsiblity of the system to prove this beyond reasonable doubt and I didnt see it. i think they should have gained alittle more solid evidence first. This is sad bc it was NOT a solid conviction and it will be one questioned by the population forever. I am sure that most of us women would like to see him strung up by his balls but they proved he cheated but he wasnt on trial for cheating. Just my two cents for whatever the hell it is worth. Love ya Angie

I'm quite shocked. I hope the judge doesn't listen to that.

Wow, what an interesting thread! I have to admit that I am a little shocked by those who say they think its just great that he got the death penalty or that he should rot in prison-- boy I hope if I am EVER charged with anything, the people who say those kinds of things are not on my jury!!! Let's face it, the guy was convicted on circumstantial evidence-- that he may not have loved his wife, that he may have been cheating on her, that he may have wanted to leave her DOES NOT mean he killed her. And PEOPLE: he does not strike me as that smart, not with the lies he told Amber etc. why is this relevant? Well because, if he was not the brightest bulb in the pack, how could he pull it off?!!!!! Not without leaving absolutely NO trace evidence!!!! I was shocked by the verdict, but then what were the jurors to do with all of the media coverage and the public who wanted him convicted (incidentally, WHO are thes PEOPLE who hang around outside the courthouse and cheering etc-- God, are they really my fellow citizens?!!! UGGH)n I saw the interview with some of the jurors on MNCBC and not ONE of them could look the interviewer in the eye and say with conviction that they did the right thing. One of them even said that he originally voted for life on Friday, but then "went over everything over the weekend" and then voted for death-- bet what he "went over" was media coverage, public opinion, friends and family comments etc! Anyway, I think the verdict was injust-- (did he do it? I don't know. I do know that it was not proved beyond a reasonable doubt)-- The death penatly recommendation is awful, when will this society become "civilized"?

Great point we need more with opinions like this on our jury's. I think that to many convict on emotion. Most jurors really do not know their true responsiblities. A verdict is not an opinion it is an observation in the courtroom, a vote that is descided only by the facts in the case, not the emotion of a woman and her child ebing murdered. The question isnt if the family suffered or if Peterson was an a**hole who cheated on his wife. It is did the prosecution prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Scott indeed murdered his own wife and unborn child, I would like to know personally what piece of evidence was so convincing to the jury that he indeed had to be the one who did it. I didnt see any solid evidence what so ever. Love ya Angie

Wow, what an interesting thread! I have to admit that I am a little shocked by those who say they think its just great that he got the death penalty or that he should rot in prison-- boy I hope if I am EVER charged with anything, the people who say those kinds of things are not on my jury!!! Let's face it, the guy was convicted on circumstantial evidence-- that he may not have loved his wife, that he may have been cheating on her, that he may have wanted to leave her DOES NOT mean he killed her. And PEOPLE: he does not strike me as that smart, not with the lies he told Amber etc. why is this relevant? Well because, if he was not the brightest bulb in the pack, how could he pull it off?!!!!! Not without leaving absolutely NO trace evidence!!!! I was shocked by the verdict, but then what were the jurors to do with all of the media coverage and the public who wanted him convicted (incidentally, WHO are thes PEOPLE who hang around outside the courthouse and cheering etc-- God, are they really my fellow citizens?!!! UGGH)n I saw the interview with some of the jurors on MNCBC and not ONE of them could look the interviewer in the eye and say with conviction that they did the right thing. One of them even said that he originally voted for life on Friday, but then "went over everything over the weekend" and then voted for death-- bet what he "went over" was media coverage, public opinion, friends and family comments etc! Anyway, I think the verdict was injust-- (did he do it? I don't know. I do know that it was not proved beyond a reasonable doubt)-- The death penatly recommendation is awful, when will this society become "civilized"?

Hey Angie:
I am with you-- really WHAT did convince them? I don't know, have not heard other than the jurors saying "he had no remorse". Well, if he did not love her anymore, wanted to be rid of her etc, then, of course he wouldn't. But still, that does not mean he killed her, and like I said above, I don't know, maybe he did, but our justice system does not work, I don't feel he was proven guilty beyond a reasoanble doubt, and whether he did or not, under those circumstances, he ought to be free.

Ohh isnt the "he showed no remorse" bring back memoried. This was used against Nick in his trial. We didnt expect any real time in rpison bc the charge the jury descided on was failing to protect his daughter and that that conduct of unprotecting led to her death, even the DA thought he wasnt gonna get any time in jail. So excuse me for going on about the DOUBLE EDGED SWORD as his lawyer called it. Had he of cried and fell apart he would have been feeling guilty for what he did and if he didn't cry then he showed no remorse. They threw Nick in prison with in twenty four hours of him witnessing her last breath. The mother turned and began lying immediately, not speculation it is in the case info. And they expected a man who had lost his daughter then blamed for her death with nothing more then a theory they developed to sit in an open courtroom with the very people who did it to him and cry. After spending almost 7 months in jail alone with no one to cry too with taunts of murdering him for what the prosecution said he did, he was supposed to open up and let them all know how they were ripping his heart out!!! Pls this ticks me off even more. NO REMORSE!!! They are saying if he cried then he would have walked free. If every criminal could walk free if they cried then where would we be. I witnessed Nick cry uncontrolably on many occassions thinking his life was over and that he would never hold his daughter in his arms again. How many of us could show emotion to strangers after facing such torment, really you learn to push it all down and face the trial. Nick couldnt even cry in front of his family after he was free bc he was concerned that if he got life they would remember him that way forever. Really this makes my skin crawl. The courtroom is different, how many of us could display how we felt when the world was calling us a murderer, no one knows....I wish I had been on that damn jury!!!

Hey Angie:
I am with you-- really WHAT did convince them? I don't know, have not heard other than the jurors saying "he had no remorse". Well, if he did not love her anymore, wanted to be rid of her etc, then, of course he wouldn't. But still, that does not mean he killed her, and like I said above, I don't know, maybe he did, but our justice system does not work, I don't feel he was proven guilty beyond a reasoanble doubt, and whether he did or not, under those circumstances, he ought to be free.

For whats its worth.. we should forget that PTO is here to support the families of those incarcerated.. and one day.. Scotts mom/dad/siblings could be here..

Is everyone going to voice their opinion so strongly when they are asking for the "support" that we as a community are known for? Or are "you" going to tell them that their child, their flesh and blood deserves to die?

Alot of us here have family/friends in who have done horrible things...

Just something to think about...

I have said many many times here that I am against the death penalty, so I will not voice my opinions on that practice. However, I think I heard somewhere yesterday that there were several jurors that did not vote for death until the very end, that there were several who preferred the option of life without parole.

I think our jury system is rediculous to say the least. If you were kept away from your family for as long as this jury was, would you hold to your convictions? Would you stand by your opinion if you were in the minority, or would you change your mind our of tiredness and longing to be home with your family? I think that juries are the biggest form of peer pressure that has ever been seen. Only the strong stick with their original thought, most of which were made before ever being called as a juror. There are too many who sit on these juries who give up on seeing justice done the way they see it, or simply do not care from the beginning. How can we actually say justice was done when we know that there is always at least one person who will "daydream" during the trial and then watch the opinions of others in the jury room to vote with the majority, and at least one person who will honestly believe different than the others, but give up in the name of getting back to work, the housework at home, spending time with their kids or just doing anything other than staying another day with 12 strangers?

I feel that if this trial didn't get so much media attention he wouldn't have gotten the death penalty. The crime he committed was sickening, but I have heard of many people doing much worse and only getting a life sentence.

Next Steps in Scott Peterson's Legal Saga




By The Associated Press

December 13, 2004


ARTICLE FEATURES
WHAT'S NEXT: Scott Peterson is scheduled to be formally sentenced Feb. 25 for the murders of his wife, Laci, and her fetus. The judge has the option of reducing the jury's death sentence recommendation to life without parole, but it is highly unusual for judges to make such moves.

WHERE HE'LL SERVE: Peterson will remain in the San Mateo County Jail until he is sentenced. If the death sentence stands, he will be sent to California's death row at San Quentin State Prison.

PRISON LIFE: Cell doors on two of the three units at San Quentin look past walkways patrolled by rifle-toting guards and out at San Francisco Bay, where prosecutors say Peterson dumped his wife's body. Peterson will be relatively protected by the solitary housing units at San Quentin, but prisoners share places like exercise yards, which have proven dangerous to inmates in the past.

ROGUE'S GALLERY: Peterson will join a celebrity rogue's gallery that includes serial killer Richard Ramirez, known as the Night Stalker for his 14 Los Angeles murders in the 1980s, and Stanley "Tookie" Williams, who co-founded the Crips street gang more than 30 years ago in Los Angeles but was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize in 2001 for writing a series of children's books.

LONG WAIT: Peterson still might not be executed for decades - if ever - and it can take years for even the first phase of the appeals process to begin. Since California brought back capital punishment in 1978, only 10 executions have been carried out. The last execution, in 2002, was for a murder committed in 1980. California is home to the nation's most clogged death row, with about 650 people in all.

JURORS: Jurors are not allowed to accept any payments or incentives of any kind for their stories for 90 days. The judge told them they are free to speak about the case, but gifts such as limousine rides, hotel rooms or even the promise of future payment for their stories is illegal until after the three-month period.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/12/14/peterson.appeals/index.html

Appeals, pace may delay Peterson's death



Tuesday, December 14, 2004 Posted: 3:45 PM EST (2045 GMT)

CNN) -- Action on a jury's recommendation to kill Scott Peterson by lethal injection for murdering his pregnant wife, Laci, could be decades away in the state that has more than 600 people on death row.
San Mateo County Superior Court Judge Alfred Delucchi will formally sentence Peterson on February 25. Delucchi can overturn the jury's death sentence recommendation and order Peterson to remain in prison for the rest of his life, but that option is unlikely, an attorney said.

"It's very rare for a judge in California to reduce a death penalty verdict," former San Mateo County prosecutor Dean Johnson said Tuesday. "(It's) even more rare for Judge Al Delucchi to do so. He gives deference and respect to the expression of the conscience of the community, as expressed by this jury."

Jurors in November convicted Peterson of first-degree murder in the killing of his wife and second-degree murder in the killing of her fetus.

Laci disappeared Christmas Eve 2002. Her corpse and that of the fetus washed ashore along San Francisco Bay four months later and a few miles away from where Peterson said he had been fishing the day she vanished.

Monday, jurors recommended death for Peterson's punishment instead of life in prison without parole.

But death sentences carry mandatory appeals, and the last person executed in California, in 2002, waited more than 20 years. Consequently the judges discretion, the appeals process and the state's pace suggests a lengthy delay before Peterson's execution.

After sentencing, Peterson will go to California's San Quentin State Prison, which houses California's 641 male death-row inmates -- the largest population in the nation.

Peterson's attorneys likely will file more appeals than the one required by law. Those appeals could drag his case out for years.

One cornerstone of those appeals could be the judge's dismissal of the jury's foreman during the guilt phase of Peterson's trial, former U.S. attorney Kendall Coffey said.

The foreman was one of three jurors Delucchi dismissed during course of the trial and deliberations.

California's pace in executing death-row inmates will be a factor in how long Peterson lives. Since California reinstated the death penalty in 1978, only 10 people have been executed, compared with 336 people in Texas, the state with the highest rate of executions.

In Modesto, where Scott and Laci Peterson lived, people reacted with relief at the sentence recommendation, which came just before the second anniversary of her disappearance. After the announcement, a single candle burned at the doorstep of the Peterson home with a sign saying, "Laci and Conner, may you rest in peace."

California is one of several states with laws dealing with the killing of a fetus. In 1970, the state Legislature added "or a fetus" to the state murder law, according to the National Right to Life Committee's Web site, which tracks state laws dealing with the fetus-killing laws. California law now states, "Murder is the unlawful killing of a human being, or a fetus, with malice aforethought."

After the addition, the California Supreme Court in 1994 ruled that the term "fetus" applies under the law after the embryonic stage of seven to eight weeks. State law also makes a defendant eligible for capital punishment if convicted of more than one murder, and the California Supreme Court ruled in 1998 that fetal homicide is included in that provision.

Peterson was eligible for the death penalty because of the provision.

Jurors said Scott Peterson's lack of emotion was one reason for their decisions, first to find him guilty and then to recommend he be sentenced to death.

"If Scott Peterson had lost his wife and baby and was innocent, and was now on trial for his life, this would be a man who was emotionally devastated, and it would show on his face," Johnson said.

"But they looked across that courtroom and they saw another stone-faced, emotionless, sometimes even happy Scott Peterson. That complete disconnect was what destroyed Scott Peterson. Ultimately, the strongest piece of evidence against Scott was Scott himself."

--------------------------------------------------------------

I have to agree with suzeg3. Scott doesn't seem to be the brightest star on the map. I've heard the saying "When you kill someone, you make 100 mistakes--15 of which you'll remember making later." How could he have done it and left the trail as perfectly clean as it was???? I think the reason the police focused on Scott in the first place was because they didn't have any other clues. The media put a halo on Laci's head and a pitchfork in Scott's hand and the police had to arrest SOMEONE. I did NOT follow the trial through the media. I did, however, follow the trail of evidence that was admitted into court (I work for a police dept. and we use cases like these as case studies). And, to be honest, the evidence that was presented couldn't begin to convince me that he was guilty. The media made him look guilty as sin. They also only gave the sensational parts of the story. It's TV. It has to be sensational. But guess what? 12 people said he's guilty, so he's guilty. Whether or not he actually killed her--he's the only one who'll ever know.
But I think if he's executed, then the State of California is as guilty of murder as he is.

The media put a halo on Laci's head

That hit me the wrong way. Poor Laci should have a halo; the media didn't need to give her one.

Otherwise, I agree with you.

I don't mean it that way. She should have a halo. But the contrast between she and Scott in the media frenzy made him look like a crazed woman hater. So why shouldn't they portray him in the same light? Why did they have to make him LOOK so damn guilty???

I don't mean it that way. She should have a halo. But the contrast between she and Scott in the media frenzy made him look like a crazed woman hater. So why shouldn't they portray him in the same light? Why did they have to make him LOOK so damn guilty???

Firstly, I believe Scott is guilty- I DO NOT believe in the death penalty, however. I also don't think there was enough evidence to convict him- but that's another story.

I don't think the media made Scott look guilty- Scott's own actions did that. For example, have you listened to the taped phone calls between Scott and Amber? I cannot believe that someone can lie so convincingly...and his lies were elaborate (NYE in Paris...etc) Scott also had affectionate conversations with Amber while Laci was 'missing'- not the actions of a concerned husband. Scott also dumped a heap of fliers instead of posting them- another indication that he may not have been innocent. Scott's own actions betrayed him. So, even though I believe Scott is guilty- I do understand that what I have mentioned don't make him a murderer- however, they place him a LONG way from being some kind of angel.

I certainly don't believe he was an angel. He was a slimy nutbag. But lies to a woman he was cheating on his wife with don't make him a murderer. Lots of men cheat, but don't murder their wives.

In California, the Death Penalty is almost equivalent to Life without Parole.
More inmates have committed suicide on Death Row in Calif than have been put to death (12 to 10).

Scott is probably "safer" on death row than he would be in with the general population. Crimes against women & children don't sit well with inmates. He will probably live longer on Death Row.

It may sound harsh, but I don't think Scott should have the "luxuries" that the general population gets. (I know, Luxury is a far stretch of the imagination, but I think you know what differences I'm referring to.)

It's sad for allof the victims. I'm not including Scott as a victim, though. I think he is guilty.

I was thinking......do you think, if Laci's mother had pleaded with Scott to spare Laci's life, do you think hewould have?
:shake:
:cry:

I'm shocked, I just heard the juror's recommendation today! I totally oppose the death penalty so I hoped for life sentence. IF he is guilty. In this case there's no winners. Laci, her family, Scott's family and the other woman...no one wins anything. Sad example of stupid man...

Susan

I am in favor of the death penalty- in certain cases. Contrary to what a previous poster stated, yes, you CAN be in favor of it in some cases and not others. I believe Scott Peterson is guilty and that the evidence showed it- in spite of there being no videotape of the event, evidence like the recently bleached floors, missing concrete anchors, his statement that she was wearing black pants and a white shirt when in fact her body was discovered wearing the pants her sister saw her wearing on the 23rd, etc., all added up to a picture Ray Charles could see. Do I believe the death penalty is the proper decision here? No. A guy like Scott who is so fond of himself and has his parents buy him a membership to a golf club he can't afford will suffer immeasurably in prison, and the longer the better, as far as I'm concerned. I don't think the jury was influenced to decide on the death penalty by the media nearly as much as they were by witnessing firsthand the anguish of Laci's mother, who is far more sympathetic than Scott's, and remember they asked to review the autopsy photos. I think the sight of her ravaged, decomposing body had to upset them, but I think that was an inappropriate basis for judgement. Anything that happened to her body after her death didn't cause her any suffering, regardless of how dreadful the photos looked. I suspect they were overcome with emotion when they made that decision.

We are all entitled to our own opinions, And mine is the same as many others, however--isn't there an ammendment in the constitution that forbids cruel and unusual punishment??? Just wondering!!! Doesn't the DP seem cruel and unusual??? Just a couple of questions I had is all!! I know my answers, and some of the rest of you would say as I do!! But, thougth I would throw it out there!!!!This exact point has been argued in countless appeals. It doesn't work- but at least you're thinking like some great legal minds!!

I feel sorry for everyone involved.. I am on the fence about the death penalty but definitely don't think anyone should get the death penalty only based on circumstantial evidence.. Geez.. the Green River Killer didn't even get the death penalty and he admitted to his murders... I think that (at least in some states) admitting to your crime automatically precludes the death penalty. Sort of a built-in plea bargain.

You say that people sentenced to death aren't allowed to testify, but aren't they sentenced after the opportunity to testify has passed? After the conviction and all?

I want to add that I do feel for the families, both, equally. I just can't imagine being in either ones shoes. I am sure it is awful, and although I can't say that I am really a death penalty proponent due to the fact that there are plenty of wrongfully convicted people on death row, if there was a situation whereby it would seem appropriate, it would be in the Scott Peterson case, if he really did it, and it seems to me that he did, but I don't know for sure. It is for that reason that I would not have voted death.
That's just my :twocents:
acpcpa


Most people sentenced to death row arent allowed to testify, for reasons that there defense dont allow them to, or some other reasons. The majority of people on death row never were allowed to testify at there own trial. It may not be that Peterson didnt want to testify, but more so, that he took advice from his legal team not to testify.

IceblueSparkles


I have to agree with you there totally!!! I would so much prefer to know that he didnt have that hanging over his head. Every appeal they have, you just sit and hope, that the judge will say, lets commute this sentence to life. If that was to happen, thats a huge victory for loved ones and there family. Someone I deeply care about has a new sentencing trial, and if the judge gives him life over death, with knowing him, and the fight he has endured on death row, I will so happy, and so will his family.

J.J


So true!!!

acpcpa
You say that people sentenced to death aren't allowed to testify, but aren't they sentenced after the opportunity to testify has passed? After the conviction and all?

There are 2 parts in the trial, first a verdict, and then the sentencing/punishment phase. So the jury can come back guilty, then a judge sets down a date for sentencing, and the jury recommends life or death.
I was doing some research on a case (not Peterson), and was just reading through interviews with the jury. Alot of them stated the same thing that happened in this case, that my friend sat there and never testified, and no remorse. I guess with a possible death sentence hanging over our heads, it would be hard to have a reaction. Yes, it does happen alot, to much actually. Most people I know on death row were never allowed to testify in there own trial. Sad, but true :(

As I sat here and read the posts, I'm inclined to say "isn't that the pot calling the kettle black" on some of these.

I think it's safe to say that the majority of us here have been through a trial in one way or another -was it fair? Did anyone lie? Did the prosecutor act with complete professionalism? I seriously doubt it.

My husband is innocent and I can prove it now that the trial is over and I finally got into information the prosecutor purposely kept from the defense. My husband was chastised also for "not showing emotion" however, that's exactly what he was told to do by his attorney. At the verdict, both of us were in shock and just stood there looking at each other in disbelief (the Sheriff detective and the accuser high fived each other). The Jury later said "see, he didn't even show emotion at the verdict either" - our jury when pulled also said that yes, the defense showed that several of the PA's witnesses' lied and we proved that the PA submitted false evidence...but "he was charged so he had to be guilty of something"
Oh, great, thanks.

We expect the guilty to not be honorable. However, we who have experienced this all know our prosecutors and police are hardly honorable either.

There are many inside who are actually innocent as we are seeing more and more of -even those who spent time on death row. Can you imagine the pain from the victim’s family to go 20 years thinking you had the right man -only to find out you didn't? So where is the right man, and what's he been doing for the 20 years you thought you had the right guy?

Most of us should know that you can make anything "sound" different by the way you present it. In trials "the rest of the story" is not always presented to the jury. The prosecutors have unlimited money and resources, and are mind set on "convictions at any cost" -we've seen it time and time again.

If prosecutors are so "sure" of themselves and their evidence to convict -why did they push and get through laws that allow them NOT to be held responsible for any wrong doing -including submission of false evidence and providing perjured witnesses.
If they're "so sure" of themselves what do they have to be afraid of?

The "lynch mob" that came out for this appalls me. It's reminiscent of the Salem witch trials -fear and our American way of loving anything sinister -the gawkers who love to slow down their cars when there has been an accident -the more gruesome the better.

It's a horrible thing for all the families. Can you imagine what Scott’s family felt as they walked out of the courtroom after the verdict to the lynch mob all booing them? These people lost their daughter in law -they were friends with her family, they lost their grandson, and now they will be forced to watch their son "legally murdered". I just thank God that my husband’s trial was so insignificant that we didn't have to endure the media like that. It was bad enough listening to the prosecutor, now it's bad enough listening to "society" who deems me "just as bad" as my husband because I've chose to stand beside a man "convicted".

No one doesn't "feel" for Laci's family -that's a given. But "what if" the verdict is wrong? I don't think anyone can say with 100% proof positive that he did it. It's "too perfect" Let's face it, the man's not that smart -let's see, he can't hide an "affair" but he can hid a "double murder"? Not even Ted Bundy could do that and was a hell of a lot smarter than Peterson.

Shock does strange things to people. I don’t see enough evidence that even gives me the feeling one way or the other. I just feel that there isn't one of us here who should be judging -especially after what most of us have seen and been through.

Putting people to death doesn't ensure us that the right person has been "punished". My soul doesn't want to take that kind of chance -especially since our system has been wrong before. One would think that should fall under the "once bitten twice shy" category, but for some reason it doesn't. It's something you can't take back. So if Peterson is executed, then we find out it was really someone else -who's "responsible" for his death? The Judge, the Jury members, the Prosecution? Do we get to put them to death next because they wrongfully killed a person?
In my opinion, the death penalty is just as absurd.

Aria:
So well put, I have nothing to add (which is really a change for me!!) :D

In response to Ariafreeman: Yes, most of us have been through some kind of trial. Do prosecutors ever lie?(or at least twist things around to fit their point). I would imagine so. Do defense attorneys do the same thing? You betcha. Is anyone ever proved guilty "100%", as you say. Rarely. Does that mean they are not guilty, or that the case shouldn't have been prosecuted? No. There would be a lot more criminals and a lot more victims running around with a burden of proof like that. Defendants are not chosen from a lottery. The prosecution has compelling reason to charge someone or they wouldn't bother. They are usually right. They are not ALWAYS right. You believe your husband is innocent. If he is, and was wrongfully convicted, you have a fight on your hands and every reason to be angry. You can't assume from that that Scott Peterson must also be innocent. My honey is guilty and I still love him. I think that's the case for most PTO'ers, as it is for the Peterson family. As for defendants' not showing emotion, I have to agree that attorneys always tell them that. It is the advice of experienced, highly paid professionals. Is it always the right thing to do? Apparently not. It would be interesting if an attorney or someone with inside knowledge would post about the exact rationale behind that. Good luck on your husband's case.

My research into the "prosecution world" was quite interesting...did you know they have "quotas"? If they don't win, they don't stay. Our appellate attorney was a former Sr. prosecutor for 20 years who got out because the "goal" was no longer justice -it was winning at any cost -even those they knew were most likely innocent, but it was either an easy case due to "public emotions" or as is standard procedure, they are required to jack up the charges and strong arm the defense into taking a deal -a deal is a "win" for the PA. Who do you think was behind the efforts for the Sentencing Reform Act? An act that took sentencing out of the hands of Judges and into the lap of leverage for the Prosecution? The more "cases" they have, the more money the PA's office gets from the pie. More money, more staff, more attorneys, more goodies. The more wins, the higher they go -the higher they go, the more money they make.
The new stats on the wrongly convicted estimate a "conservative" 35% of the now over 2 million incarcerated. Yes, there are guilty ones and even they deserve a fair and honest trial.
I know, I'm idealistic, as I still somehow believe that since our constitution says the defendant as the right to a "fair" trial that it should be so. But as we all know, everyone has a different opinion on what is "fair". I know we don't live in a fair world, but when you're talking about "legally killing" someone, I just feel we should set higher standards for ourselves.
Our country still executes those who committed crimes when they were under the age of 18 -not even Saudi Arabia does that -the guys who lop off people’s heads in the public square. Yet, we call ourselves "civilized".

All lives are precious. We should believe in respecting life. Laci and Conner are precious and deserve true justice from a fair judicial system. However, America has not located that system yet!
I believe that in order to value their lives, Scott Peterson's life has to be valued as well! I believe that everyone pays for their actions someday! In a truly higher court!I beleive at that time truth and justice will be served. True justice can never be served in the here and now!