Scott Peterson Verdict: Guilty

valerie · Post by **valerie** » Fri Nov 12, 2004 3:07 pm

Jury came back with guilty in the first degree of the murder of Laci and

guilty in the 2nd degree of baby Connor...

valerie · Post by **valerie** » Fri Nov 12, 2004 3:39 pm

I was for a long time trying to go by how *I* felt about it, watching everything

I could about the trial, and I felt I had reasonable doubt even though I thought

he did it.

One real kicker for me was the supposed 26 minutes Scott spent at his

warehouse with Laci's body in his boat or toolbox. I just didn't think that

someone would take the chance the body would be discovered and would

want to conceal it right away.

Another thing that was hard for me was the (and I don't know if the jury

was allowed to hear this) Laci-lookalike pregnant prosecutor who had a

Golden Retriever type dog named MacKenzie. Who had had death threats

made against her. I could just picture Laci going for a walk, her MacKenzie

slipping the leash, and Laci calling to him and the guys who were after the

prosecutor thought they had the right person! Timeline didn't bother me,

how long does it take to throw someone in the back of a van?

I thought the jury would hang. But then I thought the verdict if they did

make one would be guilty, for 2nd degree though I didn't think they'd go

for first.

It's all so very sad... for Scott's family especially. That was their son who was

found guilty of murdering their grandson? Incredibly sad.

Paula · Post by **Paula** » Fri Nov 12, 2004 3:45 pm

The Verdict was appropriate and well deserved. It is a shame so many people had to go through the trial, he should have admitted the crime. I wished he had taken the stand to tell is own account of what happened? People do not vanish before Christmas pregnant?

Peg · Post by **Peg** » Fri Nov 12, 2004 3:48 pm

[ I just didn't think that

someone would take the chance the body would be discovered and would

want to conceal it right away.]

But wouldn't you think too that a man would not take the life of his unborn child?

valerie · Post by **valerie** » Fri Nov 12, 2004 4:14 pm

Peg wrote: [ I just didn't think that

someone would take the chance the body would be discovered and would

want to conceal it right away.]

But wouldn't you think too that a man would not take the life of his unborn child?

Yes, I would think that. And it makes me really mad. Any criminal who does

something to a senior or an innocent, I see red. But Laci didn't have a

chance, either.

It's being reported that he showed NO emotion at the verdict... which tells

me he did it. After all, if you were innocent wouldn't you be jumping up and

down screaming no?

I think Laci's parents are going to be having a tougher time even though

Scott was found guilty. The finality of it must be really getting to them.

Peg · Post by **Peg** » Fri Nov 12, 2004 4:43 pm

Honestly, I feel sorry for Scott's family. They raised a son who was capable of murdering his own wife and child. I'm sure he wasn't raised to be a cold, heartless, spineless, mindless idiot. It's sad when you think of how many lives have been affected by this. Down the road from me, a man shot and killed his wife. Now mommy is dead, daddy in prison, the grandparents get custody, etc. His drunken rage, one moment of not thinking, has affected so many lives.

Paula · Post by **Paula** » Fri Nov 12, 2004 6:24 pm

He knew he had a problem, sexually, be a man, a person, come forward. Now he must live a life in captivity, like the Menedez's son's. To do what he did is so mis-understood, why? To be selfish and take anothers life because you lie is so mysterious. Sex, Money & Lies....How can we help people not commit crimes of murder to innocent people for their needs?

LottomagicZ4941 · Post by **LottomagicZ4941** » Sat Nov 13, 2004 12:28 am

One day I would like to be on a Jury. I think we have to respect the jury system and know that they know more about it then us. I don't know that I would be abel to convict someone just on circumstantial evidence.

__________________

Lotto

http://www.flalottomagic.net/cgi-lo...cgi?welcome-344

MagicZ4941

cars · Post by **cars** » Sat Nov 13, 2004 6:41 am

So what do you think about the Scott Peterson verdict. (For those of you that don't know of him, he was just convicted of murdering his Wife & unborn child)

He now faces the "death" penalty. I think he was a liar, cheat, and a real scoundral. (I don't like him myself) But I'm not so sure that "They" proved him guilty "beyond a reasonable doubt". All of the evidence was "Circumstancial", there was no real smoking gun. Opinions?

valerie · Post by **valerie** » Sat Nov 13, 2004 9:51 pm

I don't know about the law but I read somewhere that he was charged with

the murder because the fetus at the time would have been viable outside

the mother's body. I know it's a real gray area but so far I believe that

abortions are done at a time when the fetus will NOT be viable... although

with medical technology that is being pushed back farther and farther and with

much greater costs.

I think the media hoopla was due to the beauty of Laci, (that megawatt smile)

the time she disappeared, and then the affair "scandal". Scott could be

considered attractive, too, by many, although when I looked at him I just

thought creep.

If as has been reported murder is the number 1 cause of death of pregnant

women in north america, by their "intimates" (husband, boyfriend etc.) then

you know there are many many more out there we never hear about. Women

of color perhaps. Or low socio-economic status.

Sad all they way 'round.

Bill Sikes · Post by **Bill Sikes** » Mon Nov 15, 2004 4:40 am

Peg> I just didn't think that someone would take the chance the body would be

Peg> discovered and would want to conceal it right away.]

Peg> But wouldn't you think too that a man would not take the life of his unborn

Peg> child?

valerie wrote: Yes, I would think that. And it makes me really mad. Any criminal who does something to a senior or an innocent, I see red. But Laci didn't have a

chance, either.

But women kill their unborn children frequently - why was this man even charged?

A Karenina · Post by **A Karenina** » Mon Nov 15, 2004 8:33 am

Bill Sikes wrote: But women kill their unborn children frequently - why was this man even charged?
You've outlined the major component of this case, Bill. As someone posted farther above, it sets a precedent to outlaw abortion as murder.

Laci was pretty far along, and had every intention of carrying her child to term. The baby could've survived with medical assistance outside of the womb.

This may well become the dividing line between "abortion" and "murder of a fetus" - or it may be pushed further back than that, outlawing abortion altogether.

We'll have to see.

However, I think it's an important case in light of the violence against women rates in this country. We've had 2 major "men murdering their wives" cases here in the past year. If we begin to look at the real dangers facing women today, then many of us are willing to let the fetus charge slip by...it's a tough call, really.