• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Scott Peterson must DIE!

Tmy

Philosopher
Tmy
Joined
Oct 23, 2002
Messages
6,487
I dont see how this guy can not get the death penalty. I cant imagine that all the people on death row have done worse things than Scotty. The guy killed his very preggy wife and unborn kid, then dumped them in the bay. No remorse and no real motive. What was the motive anyway? They would cramp his style?

If he gets off they might as well scrap the DP system cause Scott will be a living representation of the DP bias.

For the Death Penalty to live, Scott Peterson must die!!!!!
 
Tmy said:
I dont see how this guy can not get the death penalty. I cant imagine that all the people on death row have done worse things than Scotty. The guy killed his very preggy wife and unborn kid, then dumped them in the bay. No remorse and no real motive. What was the motive anyway? They would cramp his style?


If he gets off they might as well scrap the DP system cause Scott will be a living representation of the DP bias.

For the Death Penalty to live, Scott Peterson must die!!!!!
Click to expand...

Its california. Even if he gets sentanced, its likely that a governer will come along that will take all prisinors off death row.
 
I didn't know you could be sentenced to death for being a cad!God knows that's all they proved!!Not murder!
 
waitew said:
I didn't know you could be sentenced to death for being a cad!God knows that's all they proved!!Not murder!
Click to expand...

Proved? I suppose that is debatable.

Convicted of two counts of Capital Murder? Absolute fact.
 
I doesn't really matter. A guy who murdered his wife and baby? He'll be shanked within a few months of entering the general population.

Death sentence either way. But first he's gonna be someone's bitch.

-z
 
I'm going with life imprisonment. Apparently, Scotty's mom put on quite the show yesterday....visibly moving a few jurors to tears....

That's ok, though. Rik's right. He'll be somebody's bitch...

"He purty....he sure is purty..."
 
I absolutely, positively, could not possibly care any less.
 
I don't know the legal criteria to decide whether he fries or not and so I'm just going by MOPC (My Own Personal Criteria) but given that I think he shouldn't fry because there is just not that much evidence that he did it. I think that whether someone fries should be a combination of how heinous the crime was and how sure we are that the guy did it. The crime was pretty heinous but the evidence that he actually did it is fairly sparse. There is a lot of "it looks bad" kinda stuff but not that much solid evidence.
 
But by ignoring the thread, I wouldn't have been able to subtlely steer you to reflect on exactly why you care.

Scott Peterson poses absolutely no threat to me or my family. He needs to pay for what he has done, but I see no reason to have his situation be of interest to me in any way. Why is it of interest to you?
 
I agree that Scott Peterson doesn't directly affect us but neither does a hundred other things we talk about. Humans are social beings and as such like to interact and discuss, etc.

Of course, the media takes advantage of that fact to give us nonstop coverage of Scott Peterson and a thousand other things aren't in themselves that meaningful (except to the people directly involved) and as a result it becomes somewhat of a circus. But the inclination for people to be interested in stuff is natural.

As a male I grew up a sports fan and at family gatherings the guys would go and watch the sports and talk about them and the women would sit in the other room and talk about stuff women talk about. At some point as I became more aware I thought "These sporting events don't really mean anything. The women are more advanced than us because they don't sit around talking about sports." And then after that it dawned on me...by and large the stuff the women sit around and talk about isn't more meaningful than sporting events. It's just that the meaningless stuff men are supposed to talk about is in one category and the meaningless stuff women are supposed to talk about is in another. But even though the stuff itself is meaningless, it serves a purpose as something to bring people together to talk about, which can then evolve into more meaningful discussions (even though it often doesn't).
 
Re: Re: Scott Peterson must DIE!

RussDill said:
Its california. Even if he gets sentanced, its likely that a governer will come along that will take all prisinors off death row.
Click to expand...

Maybe but the governor they've got now might do the deed personally. :)

I can't figure out how/why the jury convicted him of capital murder for his wife and 2nd degree for the baby. If it's first for one it has to logically be first for the other...right?
 
- Meh. Let Laci's dad kill him with his bare hands.

- Or heck, I don't care, give the man a knife too. See? I'm a liberal: let the man have a choice.
 
Beleth said:
But by ignoring the thread, I wouldn't have been able to subtlely steer you to reflect on exactly why you care.

Scott Peterson poses absolutely no threat to me or my family. He needs to pay for what he has done, but I see no reason to have his situation be of interest to me in any way. Why is it of interest to you?
Click to expand...

This discussion is bigger than Scott. Its about the DP in general.

If Scott doesnt get death then this case is a prime example of justice system bias. Specifically race and class bias in death penalty cases. Does Scott get out of the DP cause hes white, clean cut, and from a well off family?? How many poor hispanic guys are on death row for far less evil deeds.

The equal protection argument then pops up. Shoudl we dump the DP because of unfair use vs minorities ect...

So you shoudl care about the social ramifications of the Scotty p case.
 
If he gets life imprisonment justice will be served. Executing him accomplishes nothing except satisfying our need for vengeance and that shouldn't be the goal of our justice system.

With that said, I won't shed a tear if he's executed but I still don't think capital punishment is a morally acceptable thing in society (nor is killing your pregnant wife but we have the benefit of having a conscience that Peterson is missing).
 
Re: Re: Re: Scott Peterson must DIE!

Rob Lister said:
Maybe but the governor they've got now might do the deed personally. :)

I can't figure out how/why the jury convicted him of capital murder for his wife and 2nd degree for the baby. If it's first for one it has to logically be first for the other...right?
Click to expand...

Probably because motive and malace could not be shown against the baby.
 
Beleth said:
But by ignoring the thread, I wouldn't have been able to subtlely steer you to reflect on exactly why you care.
Click to expand...

Ah, but now you've made the mistake of admitting that so now I will absolutely refuse to reflect on why I care. Go ahead. Test me. Try and make me reflect. I scoff at your subtle steering.

Wait, maybe I should think about... Ha! Fooled you. I wasn't reflecting at all.
 
Tmy said:
If Scott doesnt get death then this case is a prime example of justice system bias. Specifically race and class bias in death penalty cases. Does Scott get out of the DP cause hes white, clean cut, and from a well off family?? How many poor hispanic guys are on death row for far less evil deeds.

The equal protection argument then pops up. Shoudl we dump the DP because of unfair use vs minorities ect...

So you shoudl care about the social ramifications of the Scotty p case.
Click to expand...
My experience is that there is far less racism in the legal system than you imply. The past legal history of a defendant is a far better determinant of the type of sentence someone will receive than the color of their skin.

Case in point (an anecdote, granted, but aren't all court cases?): I was almost picked to serve as a juror on this case.
(Quick summary: Three young Hispanic men get into an ugly situation with three other young Hispanic men. The three defendants drive 15 miles to get a gun and a different car, then drive 15 miles back to shoot the other three men. They find the three men and shoot them dead. But guess what? The three they killed weren't the ones they got into the original fight with. They mistook these three totally-uninvolved guys for their victims. Verdict: not life in prison, not even murder... involuntary manslaughter, the least crime they could possibly be found guilty of, with sentences of as little as 6 years.)

Why was the crime they were convicted of so light, and why were their sentences so short? The article goes into that in some depth, but a big part of it was their total lack of previous criminal record.

So. Does Scott get out of the DP because he's rich, cute, and white? Probably not. What does get him out of the DP is more likely that he's never done anything illegal before. All I really hope is that the "court of popular opinion" doesn't bias the jury one way or the other when they make their decision. That would be the real example of justice system bias.
 
I'm going to put forth my usual argument against the death penalty that I believe trumps all pro-death penalty arguments. (I'm sure not all will agree with it, of course!)

What if Peterson is executed and 10 years from now, new evidence become available that proves someone else did it. Yes, I realize that based on the current evidence, it's a pretty good bet that he did it. However, based on what I've read, jurors certainly wouldn't call this a slam dunk case.

So, if new evidence becomes available and Peterson is dead, what happens? The family gets an apology and a nice monetary settlement. We shrug our shoulders and say "Well, we get it right most of the time."
Then it becomes murder, state sponsored if you will.

Look, if Peterson did kill his wife and unborn child (which I'm quite sure he did based on my knowledge of the case), I don't take any joy knowing the guy gets to wake up every morning breathing air.
He probaby does deserve to die.

But since there might be the smallest bit of doubt, it's best just to give him life in prison. And since a lot of capital punishment cases probably have some doubt (how many cases are absolutely, 100% doubt free), the only reasonable thing to do is not have the death penalty.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom