Scott Peterson Found Guilty
 

Of two counts of murder
1st degree for Laci, 2nd for the baby.

Wow, I could have never imagined he would be found guilty.....

I agree. I honestly thought we would have O.J. all over again. I was driving listening to the radio when they read the verdict. I was so shocked & I cried. (read my above post)

Ditto.
I was also quite surprised that the verdict came so quickly after the two jurors were replaced this week.

No surprise here...

I was happy. I thought it could have gone either way. Ofcourse everything looks like he did it, but there wasn't any real, concrete evidence. I wonder what the penalty will be?

I'm glad they found him guilty, but I'm surprised it happened so soon. 1) they got two new jurors this week (I wonder if those two jurors were the ones "holding" up the group?) and 2) they had like 6 months worth of trial evidence and testimony to go through. I seriously figured it would take them longer than a week to come up with a verdict.

My heart goes out to Laci's family. As BetteDavisEyes said, nothing will bring them (Laci and Connor) back but I do too also hope that the verdict of guilty can bring some closure to her family.


Also, am I the only one who didn't get Scott Peterson's family? It just seemed like they were more interested in "defending" their son (which is important) than mourning the loss of their daughter in law and grandchild. (shrugs shoulders).

Sentencing begins on Nov. 22nd......right before the holidays too.

Not suprised at the verdict, at least now it seems like there is some closure to this long drawn out process we call the judicial system.......but it doesn't take away the fact that a family has lost their loved ones forever.

Wonder how long it'll be before an appeal?

Did you guys see his pic on the yahoo search page? Scary scary!

www.bostondirtdogs.com

Affleck....Peterson.....

SEPERATED AT BIRTH?
http://www.bostondirtdogs.com/2004/BA_sab.jpg
http://www.bostondirtdogs.com/2004/SP_sab.jpg

I don't know the law in California, but I'm glad that Scott was found guilty, I'm glad that there will be appeal, and I hope he's found guilty yet again.

The leading cause of death for pregnant women throughout this country is death by the hands of their spouse/partner. Since it took this case to publish this to the nth degree, I hope that Laci & Connor become a symbol for all the women & babies who have died because their sperm donor was a violent bastage.

I am not pro-life, as I do believe in the death penalty, and this is definitely a death penalty case!

While my mom and I were waiting to hear the verdict, we were also curious about this, but we speculated that the alternates (from our understanding) were in the courtroom the entire time, had heard all the evidence, so they likely already had some sort of opinion on whether Scott was guilty or not. Looking at it from this angle, we came to the conclusion that it wasn't that surprising it happened quickly. :o

Alternate jurors sit in the courtroom and hear the complete testimony; unlike the primary set of jurors who are sequestered in the jury room, they are sent home after deliberations commence with instructions to make themselves available at all times in the event they need to be contacted to replace a primary juror removed for illness or other cause. They fall under the same jury gag rule.

I'm actually pretty surprised that he was found guilty. There was no concrete evidence against him. They couldn't even identify a clear cause of death or whether the baby died before or after being born. There was a lot more evidence against OJ. I followed this pretty carefully and I couldn't say he did it "beyond a reasonable doubt".

I'm glad he was found guilty.

Penalty phase starts Nov. 22. I hope he fries. (Although I think that if he gets the death penalty, it will be by lethal injection?)

California executes by lethal injection, using the old gas chamber at San Quentin as the death house.

It was a scary verdict, but I am not surprised by it.

Its a scary verdict because they basically put his "character" on trial not the evidence. IF he did it, he managed to leave less forensic evidence than a proffessional killer.

With OJ I told people it was a scary verdict because if OJ was innocent it took him millions to get of, a defense fund that you and I would not be able to raise.

With PEterson its scary because it says that in the absence of an obvious supsect the police will go after the husband like that and fry him based on him not being a "nice" person.

A major motivator in that court room was the fact he was having an affair, but if every man thqat cheated killed his significant other, there would be a serious drop in the female population.

i'm so glad that they found him guilty.

i'm not sure how i feel about him being charged with connor's death. i go back and forth on that since as far as i know they never really proved that he was alive on his own when he died. if he wasn't, that's a scary precedent to set. i have to read more on the case and then i'll come back and post more.

Actually it wasn't the fact that he cheated that convicted him. I watched CourtTV yesterday and two lawyers were talking about the verdict and both agreed to the fact that what probably convicted him was the timeline. According to Scott he was 80 miles away (in the exact spot where the bodies washed up) on Christmas Eve when Laci disappeared. Scott claimed that he watched Martha Stewart the night before and she said a particular thing, well the prosecution found out that the show he was talking about watching actually aired Christmas Eve at like 9am. Then there was something about a phone call he received at 10:08 and Laci "reportedly" went missing at 10:18. They (the lawyers) were saying that it is unlikely that Laci, who was what 7 months pregnant at the time, could 1) mop the floor, 2) get dressed (shoes and all) and 3) get the dog and put him on the leash in 10 minutes. Which I have to tend to agree with. It can take you 10 minutes to mop a floor (depending on how large it is). Plus pregnant, that far along, don't move very quickly. Plus, if their dog is anything like mine, she gets super excited when she sees me grab the leash it can take me up to five minutes just to get the leash on her because she is running around and barking and all excited that she gets to go outside on a walk.

They also said what also didn't help him was the fact that there were (I believe) recorded conversations that he had with Amber saying that he was 1) widowed 2) going to be spending his first Christmas without his wife 3) did not want any biological children of his own but being a step father to Ambers son was "okay".

I personally believe and have always believed that he is guilty as sin. He is a pathological liar and his alibi was crap.

As for the evidence being circumstancial and convicting him, I'm sure if we did research we would find cases where the person was convicted with far less circumstancial evidence. Also, there was FIVE months worth of evidence and not all of it was released to the public. Some of the evidence the prosecution and police had we will probably never know.

eh...why doesnt he just hang himself and save Californians the tax dollars?

Perhaps the start of the slippery slope? :confused: It does seem credible to believe that pro-life advocates maybe wanted this in order to push other pro-life initiatives...

Question: Are there any pro-choicers out there who agree that he should have been convicted of Conner's death? Please explain this to me. Do you think Conner was a human life? If Conner was a human life, then how come all the other babies out there that are aborted are not considered a human life? Any thoughts?

Well I've heard some people claim that it's different because she obviously wanted the child. It wasn't a willful termination.

i love BDD!!

I'm sure that there are people who feel this way, but not one-tenth as many as some people would say. I'm not going to be the one who turns this thread into a pro-abortion/anti-abortion debate.

I'm not trying to turn this into an abortion debate, either, there are plenty of those. All I'm asking is "Are there any pro-choicers who think that he should have been convicted of Conner's death?" and why.

I am pro-choice and I see it this way:

In California, if you miscarry after 20 weeks of pregnancy, a fetal death certificate is required. In this circumstance, you must name the baby and make arrangements for "disposal of the remains" via cremation or burial. Given those requirements, I can see the legality of charging someone who kills a woman who is pregnant beyond 20 weeks with murder of the fetus as well.

Dee

I see. I wasn't aware of that California law. Another question, do you see the unborn child as a life? I'm just having trouble grasping the concept of "it's a human life in this situation, but it's not a human life in this situation." I'm seriously not trying to start a big abortion argument thread, I'm just interested in the topic.

Thank you for that information. I'm sure it differs from state to state, but I'm afraid that I don't even know what the law is for PA or VA. I do know that, in PA, if the killer knows that the woman is pregnant (either visually or by personal knowledge), s/he can be charged with fetal homicide.

I looked up the law for California and knew from people I've known who had still births that there is a defined point where parents have to name the baby and have a funeral, etc. When arguing something like that in court, basing the decision on that law makes sense to me. It seems to be when the law defines the fetus as a human life.

I am personally of the belief that if the fetus isn't viable outside the womb, it's not yet human life. Lacey was 34 weeks pregnant, which is almost always viable outside the womb. BUT, keep in mind that pro-choice doesn't mean that you agree with abortion in any and all circumstances up until the birth either. Some pro-choice people believe that third trimester abortions are wrong except in medical emergencies. Some believe that second trimester abortions are wrong, except in medical emergencies. Some believe that all abortions are wrong, but that they shouldn't force their belief systems on someone else. Some simply recognize that abortions happen whether they are legal or not and that keeping it legal keeps it safer for the mother than back alley abortions. A pro-choice person can believe that it would never the right solution for them, but that they shouldn't make that choice for everybody else.

I'm not sure there is any way to avoid this being an abortion thread...

Dee

Peterson's sentence comes today - and I have to say I've ignored this trial b/c it scares me to think that a husband would kill his wife and child.

I was listening to Bob and Sheri this morning and someone from CourtTV was there talking about the emotions that went on in the courtroom. The one thing that stood out was Laci's mother said "My daughter was buried with her son. But she can't even hold her baby b/c of him(Peterson)." *referring to the fact that Laci was found with no arms* OMG that just broke my heart. :(

After reading more info I honestly can't decide what's better: quick painless injection or suffering in a 6x9 cell with a one hour break each day, and prolly being some dude's bitch?

I don't think the sentence will definitely come today, though it might. The jury is still deliberating but I'm curious of how long it will take them more than what they decide.

Does sentencing life or death have to be unamious or majority? I can't remember.

Jurors, who are sequestered during deliberations, must reach a unanimous verdict to recommend that Peterson be sentenced to death.

At formal sentencing, set for February 25, [Judge] Delucchi may override a recommendation of death and sentence Peterson to life in prison without parole, but cannot override a decision of life in prison without parole.

Source: http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/12/10/pe...ase/index.html

For some reason I don't think he'll be sentenced to die.

Stillscay stuff. They didn't have any real evidence. That they got a conviction is a tribute to the media making him out to be an evil person.

This is correct. Plus, with as far along as she was, Connor wasn't abortable. If she had been a month pregnant, I would have viewed this differently. However, at this point, she had to have the child, and she obviously wanted it.

In my gut, I think that he's guilty. But my gut isn't enough of a reason to convict a man of murder, and it's certainly not enough of a reason to sentence someone to die. Scott Peterson was convicted on circumstantial evidence. Circumstantial evidence is enough of a reason to convict a man of murder, but in my opinion, it's not enough of a reason to sentence someone to die.

I personally don't support the death penalty, and I wish it weren't on the books, but that's another debate entirely. As long as it is the law, I believe that it needs to be treated very carefully. This is the ultimate penalty, here, and there should be absolutely no doubt that the person is guilty. There should be hard and fast evidence: DNA, witnesses, etc. If there's even the slightest chance that something could have been overlooked, that the defendant was wrongly convicted, then he should be sentenced to life in prison.

My take on the situation: Peterson will probably sentenced to rot in San Quentin or Pelican Bay or some evil, nasty maximum-security cesspool run by the California Department of Corrections. It'll probably piss off the Rochas to no end, but I'd be surprised if the jury recommends he gets the juice in the old gas chamber at San Quentin.

I was a big fan of the death penalty until a jury here in Oklahoma let OKC Bombing conspirator Terry Nichols live. I don't get how you can be part of something that kills 100+ people and not get the death penalty while in the same state we put people to death who created far fewer bodies.

Justice needs to be applied fairly. When it's something so final as the death penalty, that is even more important.

You are spot on about this! I'm not so sure that a random jury should ever decide whether someone should live or die, but rather a team of experts on human behavior (and no, I have no idea how to implement that!). Whether or not you get the death penalty in this country has so much to do with the abilitie$$ of your attorney, and less with whether or not you deserve it.

And I say this as someone who does believe in the death penalty!