|
Scott Peterson
I belive I could win a miss trial from this dumb ass Judge.
Scott gets arested and charged with Pre-meditated Murder. Goes to trial. Judge lets prosicuter put in evidence about Scotts boat and has a therey about what Scott did and will not let Scotts Lawyer do the same. Judge gives the jury a nother charge that they can consider, but only after the trial is over, Just as they are going off to deliberate the judge says they can also concider a Murder verdic without Pre-meditation. Now all through the trial the case has been built on the premiss that Scott plained the murder and Pre-meditated Murder gets the death penalty. Now, after the trial is over he says just in case you don't decide that its pre-meditated you can also convict with a murder vertic. Judge lets jurer stand in boat and rock it back and forth. Then the judge says it wasn't experimenting with evidence (against the law) it was investigating evidence? Judge kicks a jurer off and doesn't put a gag order on him. Judge kicks another jurer off because she did some investigating on her own? Judge lets another jurer go because he wanted to leave? And finally, one more jurer is going to leave because of a planed surgery. How did this guy get to be a judge, wether Scott did it or not makes no difference to how a trial should be held. Ron |
also Ron,
The movie has already been released, and that didnt help matters either. On Court TV, some of the Lawyers say the Jury is really screwing up the Prosecutors case and if foung guilty, there are numerous finds for appeals. Our Judicial System really sucks. enough............. |
When I found out he was fishing
When I found out he was fishing alone Christmas Eve near the place where the bodies were found. That was all I needed, guilty. Who else goes fishing on Christmas Eve, alone. Everyone is out shopping and getting ready for the big day. He's as guilty as sin.
Keith |
Peterson is probably guilty as a matter of absolutes, but probably not guilty as a matter of law. Though not written in stone, the longer the jury deliberates the better the chance that Peterson will jump slick. Extended deliberations, juror replacements, etc., ensure that the media curiosity market have juicy topic material for a long time to come and the better chance that Peterson will become some sort of ?victim?. And then perhaps some kind of weird hero figure by tapping into the media ?pity? market. Hmmm, I wonder if Peterson has signed away all future royalty considerations to his Defense Attorney. :cd:
Scamp |
ANOTHER O.J.
Gonna get away and that is it........ enough............ |
Well Reeb....
The evidence against Simpson was lots and lots stronger than what?s going against Peterson. My guess is that Peterson gets off, but there may be a string of messy appeals before that happens. Just a guess.
Scamp |
GUILTY ! First degree for his wife , Second degree murder for his son.
|
Hmmm.......
Oh me of dwindling faith, eh. Good verdict, and well fitting the crimes.
Scamp |
Listened to the verdict live
on the radio while driving home. Looks like the 2 alternate jurors that were placed this week was already on the same page. The 2 jurors that they replaced were evidently the one's out of sync with the rest of the jurors. Glad to see that they stepped up to the plate and did the right thing. The sentencing phase start 22NOV. Should take less than a week. Hope to hear that he's going to be sitting on Death Row in San Quentin. Unfortunately, like with all these POS's, it'll take years before he quits wasting oxygen. A LOT more time than there victims were given.
|
At least the scum will be off the streets
He'll be off the streets for sometime. Even with appeals, etc. He is a flight risk and will remain in prison. I'm glad the jury did the right thing. I have no doubt he did it. Doubt if he'll be given the death penalty being it was a domestic murder.
Keith |
The news indicated the judge had a slight show of excitement when the verdict was read. Peterson stands to see life without parole or the death penalty.
Simply an opinion...he would wait too long on death row wasting oxygen and spend too long in prison wasting it too. There is one life that didn't need to end so soon and one that never had a chance to start! As Keith said, "I'm glad the jury did the right thing." |
Guilty?
There ain't no fat lady singing yet.
There is so much wrong with this trial, The judge should have just given all the jurers $100. to find him guilty. Thats the only thing missing. How a jury can find someone guilty with no evidence is beyond me. I think he did it also, but I would have voted no. Or where is the fair trial. If you can find someone guilty because you don't like him. Murder and Murder 1 are both found guilty with evidence that would go beyond a resonable dought, The evidence they have don't even meat a resonable dought. Yes he was a jerk, But murder needs some evidence, not just replaceing jurers until we get the right ones. This isn't Russia. Ron |
Whoa Keith don't jump to concultions I go Steelhead fishing allmost every christmas eve because I have the river basically to myself and its peak Steelhead time also I do my shoppng early so its done and our family dosen't gather till after dark so fishing on christmas eve dosen't make you guilty. what made scott guilty was the same thing that made OJ guilty he did it. he just didn't have as good lawyers.
|
39m- to39g et al
Is Peterson a scumbag - GRANTED Should the guy have his testicles cut off - GRANTED AGAIN Was that Frye gal a critical factor against Peterson - HELL NO, IN MY OPINION SHE WAS JUST ONE IN A BOX FULL OF PETERSON'S TOYS! Was it incriminating that Peterson's wife was found in close proximity to his fishing hole - DUHH!! Do I think that he was proven guilty of murder beyond any reasonable doubt, considering the circumstantial evidence - NO There are but three entities that know the absolute truth - Peterson's wife, Peterson, and the Almighty Himself! Do I feel that a double standard exists here, visa-vis, Peterson compared to Simpson - "WHAT DO YOU THINK?" Several things are for sure, however (at least in my uneducated opinion), those being that this case was miserably handled by the judge, the jury situation is a pathetic laugh, an appeal will be granted, and Peterson is either one helluva an actor, or as guilty as sin!? If Innocent, all who were involved in this potentially lethal conviction, may burn in Hell themselves (regardless of excuses)! If guilty, then Peterson has a lot to answer for, both in this world and the next!! The final judgment (soul-wise) is in the Hand of God, as is all of our fates, regardless of position, titles, fame, finances and/or connections!! As for this puppy (the Peterson Case) it has just begun, I fear! :r: VERITAS |
Hmmmm,...
...died his hair,grew a go-tee before being arrested, had an affair, killed his wife, and unborn child, circumstancial evidence balences out like and elephant sitting on an ant, who in their right mind wouldn't convict him,.,a nd sentence him to death,...
...The 8th district in which he was tried, the most Liberial court in the Nation,... ...I'd use a chainsaw, and a dollars worth of gas, slowly,... ... |
Peterson and O.J are both good actors. O.J. pretending to struggle to put the glove on, C'MON! O.J. walked because he just had more money. The phrase "Money talks..." They were both brutal murders. Peterson did two lives , O.J. did two. That should put them both away. They both had evidence pointing to them in a big way. Lack of alliby, timing, credible story.
It's mere technicalities that let people walk today. Unfortunately we can no longer just hang them. Can we say it was a mistrial if we don't see all the evidence? How much of the evidence was presented to the jury and not the public? There were obvious faults with this trial, but enough to grant a mistrial? Incidentally, I do believe they are both guilty! |
QM3
OJ murdered two people also. |
Sorry, I stand corrected. The post has been edited to show that. Thanks Bill.
|
Evidence
The guilty verdic demands evidence to go beyond a resonable dougt.
I haven't seen any evidence he did this. He went fishing? He died his hair? He has cash on him? He had affairs with other women? Hes a jerk? Hes an ass hole? What this whole thing shows me is that dumb ass jurers from California will let someone off with a ton of evidence (OJ) and convict someone without any hard evidence (Scott) I don't really care if Scott did it or not, I would look at the courts system and how vertics are reached. Cause if we convict people because of what we feel towards them rather than the evidence, then why even have a trial, He looks guilty, lets hang him? Show me some real hard evidence, A gun, A knife, some blood, A witness, something, He died his hair isn't evidence. Ron |
The One Piece of Hard Evidence
The one piece of hard evidence that did him in was:
He was fishing in the bay very close to where the bodies were found on the day she disappeared. That put him on the scene. Also, one statement he made to the Fry girl. "That about sums it up" indicating she knew what had happened to his wife. I personally have no doubt in my mind he did it. Keith |
The unfortunate part is that the major portion of the investigation didn't start until almost a month after the actual murder. This gave Peterson time to cover most of his bases. There is also an indication Peterson tried to lose the police surveillance.
Though fairly thorough, there are always things to be forgotten. Mark Twain said, "If you tell the truth, you don't have to remember what you said." Peterson did well no doubt. |
?O.K. Gents - good points - one and all!"
"BUT" - as far as the beard and hair dying, it must be noted that the media at that time was hounding Peterson day and night! He colored his hair and took off to his parent's home in San Diego, in my opinion; to get some peace from said media! Secondly, as far as allegations that he (Peterson) was heading for Mexico to escape justice, it must be duly noted that San Diego too, is hundreds of miles south of Modesto in the San Joaquin Valley, of Central California! Peterson's parents were living in San Diego, and I would believe that, at that point in time, Peterson was looking for a friendly face away from the gore-hungry media and the blood-thirsty mobs! If Peterson were really on the lamb, he would not have stopped in San Diego, so close to the International Border - he would have gone the extra few miles. And the money that he had along with him, would not have lasted long in Mexico - what then?! "We do have an extradition treaty with Mexico you know!!" As far as Amber Frye, granted, Peterson was a scumbag who was playing around with anything with a skirt. This alone don't make him a murderer! And in all honesty, and not meant as an insult of any kind, how many of you would have committed so horrendous a crime for the likes of that Frye gal? (Come on now, give me a break!!) Next, many a brilliant murderer has attempted to cover his ass after the fact, and even the most intelligent of felons have failed to catch some minute evidence of the crime! Yet, the media and legal system would have us all believe that a man who so cleverly and absolutely removed all forensic evidence from a crime scene, would be stupid enough to dump his wife's body right were he fishes, and not a few miles further, out in the open sea. A sea that quickly washes away all signs and evidence? "Do I personally think that he did it?" - I don't know, but this case is purely circumstantial (opinion) and I was surprised that, on the basis of the lack of evidence, he was convicted, even with the legal musical chairs, and the guilty mindset that existed from square # 1!? Maybe Peterson should have changed his name to OJ and fell back upon past glories, as only a damned fool would believe that justice treats all humanity in the same fashion!? That "Dear Old Bitch (Justice)" is not only blind, she is often prostituted!! "Hell, and you thought that Judas alone sold out for a hand full of silver!!" Those who eternally hunger for fame and fortune do so every day. But what the heck, Hell ain't half full, and I truly believe that when these cretins, regardless of earthly position, arrive beyond the River Styx, they will bellow out like wounded banshees, and only then learn the real meaning of truth! (Ooops!) It is further my opinion that those who pre-judge, or put their foots in their mouths in a fashion that could mean big legal, ego, or personal troubles, ?WILL?, more times than not, delve out a vested form of judgment in order to close a book and cover their own asses, even at the expense of someone else?s life! Again, I know not for sure if Peterson is innocent or guilty, but I do feel that the lynch-mob mentality has come into play here! And as a Deputy Sheriff once told me - "The Jails are loaded with the innocent" - for that mater, ?SO ARE THE MORGUES!? In a nation that murders unborn children by the hundreds of thousands, do you not find it strange that maybe some of the same "Killers By Choice? are the first to buy a rope, even in a case where circumstantial evidence could get someone hung? So what happens down the line (if Peterson is ever found innocent) - an apology or flowers at his grave perhaps!? Or will we, like some powers that be, merely shrug it off like they have in the past with the "MK Ultra and other systemic (experimantation) Debacles", and in the process, gleefully accept provable perjury by the highly placed as law? After all, we must be a team players, never make waves, and always pass off our fatal transgressions as being socially acceptable at the time (a Third Reich Mentality). ? Or will we all just go back to sleep, and then carry on as if nothing has happened, forever trapped within a mass-created and totally acceptable trance?? "Hell, we've got the media and the system, we have no need of drugs or booze!!" :t: VERITAS & RIP |
Heith, HC
Keith, your kidding, right?
So every fisherman that fishes there is a killer? Or just the ones you don't like? Fishing don't make a killer. He was driving in the same area, he must have did it? Thats not evidence, thats coincidence, at best. Those people convicted him cause he is a jerk and cheeted on his pregnant wife. Thats not how the system works. HC, I don't useually agree with you, but you got me hear, at least about 80% . If this conviction stands the whole system is in for a big shock. Im glade its in California, That wouldn't fly in Texas. Ron |
While I'm more on the side that Peterson is guilty, I have to beleive that the justice system let us all down. Hopefully, Peterson can get a new trial through an appeals. It was always my understanding that if a jury was hung, you called a mistrial, you didn't replace the jurors that didn't agree with the majority so that a verdict could be reached. On that alone, I hope a new trial is granted. I want this man convicted, but I want him convicted FAIRLY. If this conviction stands, we as a Nation are no better then governments of oppression we are fighting against with the lives our our servicemen and women.
|
This is what we get instead of news: bread and circuses
|
Ron,
It was Christmas Eve. If my memory serves me correctly, he was the only one to use that boat launch that day. That put only one person at the scene of the body dumping and the one person who had the motive. In my mind, that's pretty hard evidence.
I haven't read all the evidence presented at the trial but I'm sure the jury went through it very carefully. Keith |
In my mind they need to establish that Peterson was AT THE SCENE where the murders took place, AT THE TIME the murders took place.
They charged this man with murder BEFORE thay had any BODIES. I agree that he is guilty, but he was charged and convicted not on evidence, but conjecture. What ever happened to HABEAS CORPUS? This smacks of the Hitler bomb plot trials only not as fast. |
I think he is gulity and I am happy with the verdic..
thats all i am saying about this besides.... I was late for work waiting to see what the verdic was.. love ya tina |
Not only was he the only one to use the launch, but he didn't have the proper equipment to fish for sturgeon. He had freshwater fishing gear, drove over 90 miles to the launch and passed several freshwater fishing spots on the way. He was in a trashy area not known for sturgeon. A hydrologist connected the unborn childs washup to Petersons fishing spot.
For HC. There are far better ways to eliminate a wife than a brutal murder. Especially for likes of faye. He had to know he was going to be on the chopping block eventually. His stories and actions put him there. There is enough evidence to point to his guiltiness. The point to look more closely at is the lack of good "judgement" on the American judicial system! |
Guilty
I think most everyone in the country belive that Scott most likely did it. Thats not what Im talking about. The court system is whats the matter in this case. The whole thing just stunk, Saying he was the only one fishing that day is most likely not correct, and even if it is true that don't make him a killer, it makes him a good fieherman.
I go fishing a lot when there is no one else around, I go to the track and run every day and on the days when its cold and raining,(including Christmas Eve) Im the only one there, that don't make me a killer. Our court system is based on inocent until Proven guilty, not guilty if I don't like the way you act. I was on a jury that did that to a guy, (found him guilty with no evidence) I told them then that I didn't care, If they wanted to vote him guilty and they could live with themselfs, then hes guilty. I also called the guys lawyer after and told him what we had done. Lets say for one second that he didn't do it and he was just fishing, and now put yourself in his spot. After all no one knows if he did it or not, thats what the evidence is for. If you stopped by a convinence store and 5 mins latter it was robbed, It must have been you that did it, Give me some real evidence or don't go to trial. Ron |
Reading between the lines of the media spin, it appears that the bulk of the Jury was ready for the vote early-on. However, it seems that the Jury foreman was resisting the vote in lieu of pouring over his copious notes. Apparently, the Jury revolted over the endless examination of the Forman?s notes and complained, etc. Having been on our County Grand Jury for over a year, I know that in this State there is no set procedure for Jury deliberations aside from the Judge?s instructions and State legal requirements. As a former Grand Jury Foreman I found the most useful tool was to vote often and use that as the catalyst to wash up disagreement, review evidence and discuss relevant points of contention or testimony. I have no idea what the deliberation procedures are in California but it sounds to me like the Foreman was being super cautious; perhaps to a fault, but in a capital murder case maybe that?s the right thing to do, I don?t know.
A relevant point in this Jury flail is that they were ready to vote fairly early and that is a direct indication that either the Prosecution or Defense had made its case. In a case where the evidence is virtually all circumstantial I would think it would be very difficult to get an early Jury vote, very difficult. I would presume the Jury alternates were in the deliberation room but had no vote, if so, they were up to speed. If not, then there may be a basis for a Jury challenge at the appeals level, just guessing. No doubt it?s going to get messy but if justice is served, then so be it. Ya, in my opinion Peterson is probably guilty. The fishy fish saga plus the intense melodramatic Amber horn polishing thing, plus all that undying love deal gives me an itch where I can?t scratch. Stupid, selfish, vicious, hotter than a pepper sprout, horn dog boy comes to mind, but we?ll see what the legal system churns out. Scamp |
Peterson is almost certainly guilty, but I don't believe justice was served.
I gotta get in the boat with Ron on this one. I think the system failed. Our judicial system, even when operating at its highest accuracy, is not perfect. From time to time an innocent person is going to go to prison or be executed. The founding fathers knew this, and to keep this possibility at a bare minimum decided to try to err on the side of the innocent. Their philosophy was that it is better for a guilty man to go free than for an innocent man to be convicted. I don't see that philosophy today. Circumstantial evidence and over-zealous prosecutors are not a good mix for innocent people. After comparative DNA was found to be so accurate, look at all the people it released from prison who were convicted for crimes they didnt commit. How do you compensate somebody for taking twenty years of his life away? Maybe we should change the system so that when a person serving time is found innocent, the prosecution team that sent him to prison takes his place. |
Having a background in law, It sounds like the original foreperson on the jury was being very cautious. He obviously knew he was working with circumstantial evidence. Knowing this, he was making sure he knew all the facts. Probably the reason the other "hang 'em" jurrors felt he needed to go.
|
I suspect they let OJ walk and they weren't going to let this guy walk too. The guys a dirt bag and yet I don't think he'll admit to anything - ever. Circumstantial yes - guilty yes - but the actual evidence is pointing at him no one else? His lack of compassion when his wife went missing really makes him look bad. His ongoing relations with his new squeeze during this time was really cold blooded and his blank expressions and his unwillingness to put his house up as a reward also makes me a little leery.
He's guilty as sin and I think they jury did its job. I don't think he'll get the needle but don't think he will be walking the streets anytime soon - if ever again. Plenty of time to reflect and who knows maybe he'll get another trial. If your gut tells you something is helter skelter than you are normally correct. He's a cold person and have very little heart not to express grief at the loss of his wife or his first to be born son, which to me would've pushed my over the edge. No anger no emotions something is really wrong. If I didn't do something and yet they were going to make me the fall guy I would be explosive and angry and upset about the whole thing. He's got no emotions - scary. |
That?s right Boats, one cold, heartless MF, period. I think people can understand crimes of passion or emotional circumstance but this crime is completely devoid of passion or emotional circumstance. But rather, the cold, calculating, vicious, selfishness goes beyond usual rational human understanding. Maybe that?s why this case has gotten so much media attention and public curiosity. Yikes, talk about a journey to the dark side of the human condition. I wonder which side of Peterson will emerge when the slammer door goes slam for keeps.
Scamp |
If he was guilty and convicted then justice was served.
["Peterson is almost certainly guilty, but I don't believe justice was served." Rigger]
Haven't you contradicted yourself Steve? If he was guilty then justice was served. I don't think we should be so harsh on the jury. We didn't sit through hours and hours of evidence. An accumulation of evidence even circumstantial can result in a guilty verdict. I have always believed the "smoking gun" was that by paying the parking fee at the dock he placed himself on the scene. Also, (if my memory serves me correctly) his was the only parking slip turned in on Christmas Eve. That to me is extremely hard evidence. That I believe is what got him plus all those conversations with Amber Fry, and his on going affair with Amber before and after his wife's disappearance. If he was guilty and the jury convicted Him, then indeed justice was served. Keith |
Keith,
I agree - he got a much better trial than most of us would have gotten and he got the best lawyers - so his piers found him guilty so I'm not second guessing them . Nor do I have any pity for this guy. Your right - we didn't have all the facts and I'm sure that he got a better trial than he really deserved. Justice has been served but what cost to the loss of a woman and her unborn child. This trial cried out for justice for their sake. |
To connect HC's thread, "Beyond a reasonable doubt" this one.
Reasonable Doubt; "The level of certainty a juror must have to find a defendant guilty of a crime. A real doubt, based upon reason and common sense after careful and impartial consideration of all the evidence or lack of evidence in a case." "Proof beyond a reasonable doubt, therefore, is proof of such a convincing character that you would be willing to rely and act upon it without hesitation in the most important of your own affairs. However, it does not mean an absolute certainty." Was it??? |
circumstantial evidence
NOUN: Evidence not bearing directly on the fact in dispute but on various attendant circumstances from which the judge or jury might INFER the occurrence of the fact in dispute. Does "circumstantial" = "beyond a reasonable doubt"? |
There seems to be a fine line between the guilty conviction based upon reasonable doubt and that of circumstantian evidence in this case. Though the evidence points to Peterson being guilty, there doesn't appear to be any solid evidence to show he actually killed Laci and the unborn son. The jury seemed to have an opinion prior to the deliberations and did what they had to toreach a guilty verdict. If all the jurors can live with the conviction for the rest of their lives, good for them. In my mind I believe he's guilty, but on the other side of the fine line, I would question my own justice if I were the one to hand the guilty verdict down.
|
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:01 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.