Peterson Case

Nneena · Post by **Nneena** » December 13, 2004, 6:59 pm

http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/12/13/peter ... index.html
Quite surprised at the verdict. I just had a feeling it was going the other way.

Lynks · Post by **Lynks** » December 13, 2004, 7:15 pm

From what I read, the jury wasn't able to prove 100% that he did it. Even though he probably killed them, its not 100% and I hope the judge doesn't grant it.

mandalynn-veeshan · Post by **mandalynn-veeshan** » December 13, 2004, 7:15 pm

i was surprised as well

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » December 13, 2004, 7:18 pm

He should have blamed it on video games. Now he's screwed.

Lohrno · Post by **Lohrno** » December 13, 2004, 7:22 pm

I still don't understand how this is a double murder.

-=Lohrno

Akaran_D · Post by **Akaran_D** » December 13, 2004, 7:26 pm

Because she was pregnant.
Very glad he got the death penalty for this.

Lynks · Post by **Lynks** » December 13, 2004, 7:26 pm

Lohrno wrote:I still don't understand how this is a double murder.

-=Lohrno

I think they found the baby a mile down the river. Police speculate she gave birth just before her death.

Lynks · Post by **Lynks** » December 13, 2004, 7:27 pm

Akaran_D wrote:Because she was pregnant.
Very glad he got the death penalty for this.

Why, there was a lot of doubt when he was convicted. I'm all for the death penalty, but only when you know 100%, and in this case, you don't.

Akaran_D · Post by **Akaran_D** » December 13, 2004, 7:30 pm

What was the doubt?
Everything I've read fingered him pretty damn good into it.

Lohrno · Post by **Lohrno** » December 13, 2004, 7:34 pm

Lynks wrote: I think they found the baby a mile down the river. Police speculate she gave birth just before her death.

Fair enough. I was under the impression that her body decomposed and it came out.

-=Lohrno

Lynks · Post by **Lynks** » December 13, 2004, 7:36 pm

There was no direct evidence that proved his guilt, just coincidences. Its enough to convict him, but not kill him.

And by direct evidence, I mean, they can't physically put him at the scene at the time of her death.

Akaran_D · Post by **Akaran_D** » December 13, 2004, 7:39 pm

Ah, gotcha.

Lohrno · Post by **Lohrno** » December 13, 2004, 7:40 pm

Akaran_D wrote:What was the doubt?
Everything I've read fingered him pretty damn good into it.

Yeah. The thing is it does set a bad precedent as there didn't seem to be any hard evidence. Just a heaping pile of circumstantial evidence. Evidence that isn't hard but points at him anyways.

I'm not sure because he should probably be brought to justice, but I'm not sure I like the precedent this case is setting.

-=Lohrno

Zaelath · Post by **Zaelath** » December 13, 2004, 7:44 pm

At the current rate of one execution every couple of years, he'll be dead in 3305! -- Oh... wait.

Peterson still might not be executed for decades, if ever. That is because California's death row has grown to house about 650 condemned men and women since the state brought back capital punishment in 1978, according to the AP.

Since then, only 10 executions have been carried out -- the last one in 2002. It can take years for even the first phase of the appeals process to begin.

Ever wonder if part of this is the judiciary don't like the death penalty?

Akaran_D · Post by **Akaran_D** » December 13, 2004, 7:46 pm

Wasn't aware of that, haven't been tracking the case that closely (had a local bastard here in my quiet section of the coutnry rape and then murder an 8yr old girl that grabbed most of my local headlines) and I thought they had hard evidence.

That being said, I'm against the death penalty being used in cases where there is no completely, rock solid physical evidence and DNA testing. However, he now has more chances to appeal since he will be given that sentance than he would if he had been sent into prison for life w/o parolle(sp). If he's innocent - and his lawyers would have to suck much not to win an appeal if he is - then there's a better possibility that he'll get out alive than actually face death itself.

Midnyte_Ragebringer · December 13, 2004, 7:55 pm

YAY!

First the Election of 2004 and now this. Damn it has been a good end of the year.

Lynks · Post by **Lynks** » December 13, 2004, 7:56 pm

One can only hope you get convicted of a crime you didn't commit and get sentenced to death.

Even after reading (assuming you can read) evidence that says we don't know 100% if he is guilty, you go ahead and make an ignorant statement like that. This proves you do not have an iota of common sense in your thick head.

Midnyte_Ragebringer · December 13, 2004, 7:58 pm

Lynks wrote:One can only hope you get convicted of a crime you didn't commit and get sentenced to death.

Typical mature response. Perfect example of why what you have to say means zero.

Lohrno · Post by **Lohrno** » December 13, 2004, 8:04 pm

Midnyte_Ragebringer wrote:
Lynks wrote:One can only hope you get convicted of a crime you didn't commit and get sentenced to death.
Typical mature response. Perfect example of why what you have to say means zero.

Yeah just about as mature as "Great! I'm glad he's gonna fry!" In light of the lack of hard evidence, I would say you are definitely being a twat.

-=Lohrno

Lynks · Post by **Lynks** » December 13, 2004, 8:06 pm

You cheer his death sentence and its perfectly normal.
I cheer your death sentence and I am immature.

I don't get it. Where is Kyo with her stupid to english dictionary?

Lohrno · Post by **Lohrno** » December 13, 2004, 8:09 pm

Honestly I hope he is taken out of society if there is some hard evidence.

But I am against the death penalty. Not because it's wrong to take a life under any circumstance (if he did, we would be justified in removing him), but because mistakes can be made, and not taking the lives of innocents is worth not killing a few people.

-=Lohrno

Lynks · Post by **Lynks** » December 13, 2004, 8:12 pm

I agree with the most part, but if there is ever a case when the murderer is caught on tape doing something so inhumane, that I would feel no remorse for sentencing him to death. I don't think that happens too often though.

Lohrno · Post by **Lohrno** » December 13, 2004, 8:14 pm

Lynks wrote:I agree with the most part, but if there is ever a case when the murderer is caught on tape doing something so inhumane, that I would feel no remorse for sentencing him to death. I don't think that happens too often though.

Even videotape is not infallible. You could theoretically create some convincing enough CG and frame someone...I mean if it was proved beyond even a shadow of a doubt that there was no way that someone did something like that and could not be staged then yes.

-=Lohrno

Lynks · Post by **Lynks** » December 13, 2004, 8:19 pm

improbable, but not impossible

touché

Calixte · Post by **Calixte** » December 13, 2004, 8:59 pm

Lynks wrote: I think they found the baby a mile down the river. Police speculate she gave birth just before her death.

She didn't give birth before she died. Had she, the fetus would've been in far worse shape than he was. He was still relatively intact, where as she was missing most organs (save her uterus) and limbs. Since his exposure to the water/marine life seemed minimal, most speculated he was actually in the womb until just a few weeks before the bodies washed ashore.

Xzion · Post by **Xzion** » December 13, 2004, 9:04 pm

Ive stated my opinion on this before, and i believe the verdict is noones business but the jurys, a bunch of misinformed people with no lives trying to catch some drama as a mans life hangs in the balance is pretty sick in my eyes

I am strongly against the death penalty for several reasons, regardless of circumstance, so by that aspect i dont approve of it, other then that i have no opinion on his guilt or innocense, and i dont believe anyone needs one other then those in the jury or immideatly effected

Xzion · Post by **Xzion** » December 13, 2004, 9:07 pm

Midnyte_Ragebringer wrote:YAY!

First the Election of 2004 and now this. Damn it has been a good end of the year.

your fucking sick

Spankes · Post by **Spankes** » December 13, 2004, 9:07 pm

I didn't follow the case so I am not looking to get in to the debate really. But, the fact that the case was all circumstantial does not mean it was a bad case. The entire OJ trial was circumstantial and I pity anyone who thinks he didn't do it.

Fash · Post by **Fash** » December 13, 2004, 9:09 pm

If my wife went missing,
and i had,
concrete anchor molds,
a boat none of my family knew about,
a habit of lying to everyone i talked to,
a mistress,
another mistress,
and i was to,
tell my mistress my wife was dead weeks prior to her disappearance,
say she went missing,
try and sell the house,
stake out the cops at the marina searching for the body,
dye my hair,
disguise myself,
get $10,000 in cash,
and get caught by the cops while heading towards mexico,
by all means,
fry my fucking ass.

Lohrno · Post by **Lohrno** » December 13, 2004, 9:10 pm

Spankes wrote:I didn't follow the case so I am not looking to get in to the debate really. But, the fact that the case was all circumstantial does not mean it was a bad case. The entire OJ trial was circumstantial and I pity anyone who thinks he didn't do it.

If it's all circumstantial, then you haven't proved it beyond a shadow of a doubt. When you're talking about someone's life...you had better prove it beyond the shadow of a doubt.

-=Lohrno

Lynks · Post by **Lynks** » December 13, 2004, 10:57 pm

Calixte wrote:
Lynks wrote: I think they found the baby a mile down the river. Police speculate she gave birth just before her death.
She didn't give birth before she died. Had she, the fetus would've been in far worse shape than he was. He was still relatively intact, where as she was missing most organs (save her uterus) and limbs. Since his exposure to the water/marine life seemed minimal, most speculated he was actually in the womb until just a few weeks before the bodies washed ashore.

Then how did the baby have tape around his neck? http://www.courttv.com/trials/peterson/053003_ap.html

Either he was born, or was ripped out.

Soreali · Post by **Soreali** » December 13, 2004, 11:58 pm

Midnyte_Ragebringer wrote:
Lynks wrote:One can only hope you get convicted of a crime you didn't commit and get sentenced to death.
Typical mature response. Perfect example of why what you have to say means zero.

Pot, meet kettle.

Calixte · Post by **Calixte** » December 14, 2004, 12:03 am

Lynks wrote: Then how did the baby have tape around his neck? http://www.courttv.com/trials/peterson/053003_ap.html

Either he was born, or was ripped out.

It was loosely knotted around his neck. I believe they said it didn't look like it was tied on intentionally. It probably ended up around there as his body was drifting.

EDIT: Laci's body had tape on it when they did the autopsy. Maybe he became tangled on part of it when he was released from her body? No one really knows. It is all speculation.

However, in the autopsy report, there was no indication that Laci gave birth via C-section or vaginally. It just didn't happen.

VariaVespasa · Post by **VariaVespasa** » December 14, 2004, 12:06 am

Not sure why having a boat his family didnt know about is relevant mind you.

*Hugs*
Varia

Brotha · Post by **Brotha** » December 14, 2004, 12:09 am

Midnyte_Ragebringer wrote:YAY!

First the Election of 2004 and now this. Damn it has been a good end of the year.

Only thing that would make it better would be if Arnold carried out the execution himself. That's all he'd have to do to convince the far right wingers that he's not as moderate as some say!

Kelshara · Post by **Kelshara** » December 14, 2004, 12:14 am

Imagine that, certain neocon fanatic idiots are ready to kill somebody without hard evidence! What a surprise!

..don't need evidence for war..
..don't need evidence for death penalty..
..don't need to show any resemblance of intelligence to be one of the gang..

Brotha · Post by **Brotha** » December 14, 2004, 12:20 am

Kelshara wrote:Imagine that, certain neocon fanatic idiots are ready to kill somebody without hard evidence! What a surprise!

Liberals making excuses for a murderer, imagine that!

Lynks · Post by **Lynks** » December 14, 2004, 1:02 am

Brotha wrote:
Kelshara wrote:Imagine that, certain neocon fanatic idiots are ready to kill somebody without hard evidence! What a surprise!
Liberals making excuses for a murderer, imagine that!

Who's doing that here? Some people are making a case for a death sentence, not wether if he is guilty or not.

Midnyte_Ragebringer · December 14, 2004, 1:56 am

Lynks wrote:You cheer his death sentence and its perfectly normal.
I cheer your death sentence and I am immature.

I don't get it. Where is Kyo with her stupid to english dictionary?

LOL

Difference is I haven't murdered anyone.

Wow. Yeah. Good one. Boy you are a smart one. Gosh, I sure feeled owned.

Lohrno · Post by **Lohrno** » December 14, 2004, 1:59 am

Brotha wrote:Liberals making excuses for a murderer, imagine that!

Show me or shut your pie hole.
Name ONE place liberals are making excuses for murder here.

-=Lohrno

Kelshara · Post by **Kelshara** » December 14, 2004, 2:06 am

Don't hold your breath.

Midnyte_Ragebringer · December 14, 2004, 2:06 am

Lohrno wrote:
Brotha wrote:Liberals making excuses for a murderer, imagine that!
Show me or shut your pie hole.
Name ONE place liberals are making excuses for murder here.

-=Lohrno

If you can't tell by the tone of many posters here in this thread, they don't believe he is guilty. In many liberals eyes these days if you don't have it on tape, they just MAY be innocent despite hours of police work and evidence. It's fucking pathetic. People like this are the reason OJ is free after brutally murdering two people.

Lohrno · Post by **Lohrno** » December 14, 2004, 2:10 am

Midnyte_Ragebringer wrote: LOL

Difference is I haven't murdered anyone.

Wow. Yeah. Good one. Boy you are a smart one. Gosh, I sure feeled owned.

With this response you just owned yourself.

A Recap -

Midnyte: Good, I'm glad he's gonna die.

Lynx: I'd be glad if you got executed for a crime you didn't commit. (pointing out that it's not good to be happy about someone going to death on no hard evidence)

Midnyte: That's mighty immatre of you. That's why I don't have respect for your opinion.

Lynx: You're happy someone is going to die, and that's normal? I would be happy if you're going to die and it isn't? You're not the sharpest tool in the shed are you?

Midnyte: Haha, but I didn't kill anyone.

...

Are you saying that there is evidence beyond a shadow of a doubt that he did it? I mean I believe he did but I'm not 100% convinced. Detective Midnyte is on the case! You obviously have way more hard evidence on this matter than the Modesto county Sheriffs office, and District attorney's office, so why don't you go down and share it with them.

Or are you saying that hard evidence is not necessary to put someone to death?

-=Lohrno

Rivera Bladestrike · December 14, 2004, 3:34 am

I'm liberal and I think he did it and I'm glad he's getting it hard.

I'm in agreement with the jury and I think that he killed his wife and his unborn son as a result. I hate when high profile cases like this have the killer get off (OJ?). They're guilty, they deserve whatever the jury sentenses them.

Lohrno · Post by **Lohrno** » December 14, 2004, 4:52 am

I think he probably did it too and probably should be removed from society. Still, there was no hard evidence, and executing people without hard evidence is bad. I would have preferred to see life in prison with a possibility to appeal for death later if they find it.

-=Lohrno

Laliana · Post by **Laliana** » December 14, 2004, 5:07 am

I agree with the verdit and I agree with the punishment.

Spang · Post by **Spang** » December 14, 2004, 9:50 am

if Peterson didn't do it, who did?

Lynks · Post by **Lynks** » December 14, 2004, 9:53 am

I'm not saying he didn't do it, all I'm saying there wasn't any hard/direct evidence to sentence him to death, which is a requirement for this, you know? 100%?\

And Midnyte, you shouldn't assume because you make an ass out of you and, well, just you.

Midnyte_Ragebringer · December 14, 2004, 9:55 am

Lynks wrote:I'm not saying he didn't do it, all I'm saying there wasn't any hard/direct evidence to sentence him to death, which is a requirement for this, you know? 100%?\

And Midnyte, you shouldn't assume because you make an ass out of you and, well, just you.

OMG

Do you know anything 100%? No matter what you think...you don't...no one does.

Lynks · Post by **Lynks** » December 14, 2004, 9:57 am

And you feel comfortable putting someone to death without knowing 100%? I know I wouldn't, but then again, I have morals.