Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
First, I'm not as clueless as you think I am. And for the record, I happen to oppose the death penalty for the very reasons you stated. Too many people that are actually innocent have been put to death. I'm not quite sure where you got (from my comments) that SP should be an exception. I replied to your comment, "Peterson is unlikely to end up receiving the death penalty." Unless you are talking about his conviction and sentence being overturned on Appeal, I took your comment to mean that he hasn't received the DP yet. Perhaps our wires were crossed. I don't blah, blah, blah about anything, fyi. And, lastly ... If I cared to, I could post the Court's Decision regarding California's DP but I figure people are smart enough to look it up for them self, if they are interested. I don't insult their intelligence, as you have done mine.
I believe Peterson is guilty. I also believe its an inappropriate case for the death penalty. For starters, there are no witnesses. There is no proof about how Lacey was killed. I think whenever a killing occurs in the context of a marriage, the death penalty should be rare or nonexistent. The marital relationship can produce some intense emotional feelings that are different than a robber deciding to kill his victim, or a sex criminal choosing to murder his prey. Peterson is unlikely to end up receiving the death penalty and I suspect it will all end up being a bigger waste of tax money in a state with a 17 billion dollar deficit than just keeping him in prison would be.
Mark,
Normally we agree on most things. This, however, I disagree with you. Not the fact Scott doesn't deserve or merit the death penalty, its the "eye witness" issue. I don't trust in eye witness testimony much. For me, being an investigator, physical evidence means more to me then witness statements.
I also totally believe, as a man, who has put several people on death row, our system needs to be revamped. The obvious guilty: Richard Alan Davis, et al should have been killed long ago. This would totally lower the costs associated with the death penalty.
The "unsure?" The questionable cases? Great. Give em the appeals. If we change things, it would be cheaper. However, no one wants to discuss the real truth.
Scott Peterson will drag on for decades, due to the unknown factors and lack of total physical evidence. Soon, we shall have no death penalty.
I cannot WAIT for the first murderer to get out of jail and kill again. Some lily white cheerleader, so it makes the news. And then, the rally cries...
Bundy? He fried in florida a couple decades ago, and served his time in the relative safety of death row after his last conviction and his time of being labeled a mass murderer (although I am happy to read that he was gang raped at one point by his fellow death row convicts).
FSP or "Old Flat Top" as it was known back then was anything but safe. Sure they were on 23 hour lockdown single cell, but there was yard and shower time as well. Back then there were no individual dog kennel runs for exercise safely.
By all accounts I've read he was respected by other inmates and a halfway decent handball player. He denied the gang rape accusation. Some like Bundy with some education and some background in law are often viewed as being invaluable to the typical low IQ dropout murderer who sits on the row.
Normally we agree on most things. This, however, I disagree with you. Not the fact Scott doesn't deserve or merit the death penalty, its the "eye witness" issue. I don't trust in eye witness testimony much. For me, being an investigator, physical evidence means more to me then witness statements.
I also totally believe, as a man, who has put several people on death row, our system needs to be revamped. The obvious guilty: Richard Alan Davis, et al should have been killed long ago. This would totally lower the costs associated with the death penalty.
The "unsure?" The questionable cases? Great. Give em the appeals. If we change things, it would be cheaper. However, no one wants to discuss the real truth.
Scott Peterson will drag on for decades, due to the unknown factors and lack of total physical evidence. Soon, we shall have no death penalty.
I cannot WAIT for the first murderer to get out of jail and kill again. Some lily white cheerleader, so it makes the news. And then, the rally cries...
What a profoundly disturbing sentence.
Abolishing the DP does not automatically mean murderers will be released from jail...one thing has nothing to do with another. The alternative to the DP is life without parole, not setting them free!
Who knows why people like SP do what they do? I don't think there is one reason. Too bad that he hasn't already been executed.
About the death penalty, I believe in it. Unfortunately, it is costly because it takes far too long to execute it. It's almost cheaper to re-try every death row inmate with modern technology at our disposal. If it is proven without a doubt that he/she committed the crime that he was originally charged with, he is led into the next room, and executed.
This applies to all gang members as well. They should all be tried as co-conspirators to commit domestic terrorism, which should carry the maximum punishment: death. If one gang member murders, they all are charged for the crime, and if convicted, they all hang. The penalty should be executed immediately. This means gang member G is convicted of killing innocent bystander B at 3pm, and by 3:30pm, G is executed. The rest of the gangmembers from G's gang are then tried as co-conspirators, convicted, and put to death within 30 minutes. Effective use of DP to thwart a period in this society's history where teenagers think it's OK to be in gangs and shoot innocent men, women, and kids. Time to get medieval on these savages until this out-of-control violence is eliminated.
I'd like to see the DP used to eliminate these savages, not to rehabilitate or punish. Hardcore I know. Thank God it's not up to me. People who kill, rape, maim, and violate the families, personal residences, space, peace and tranquility of innocent people don't have any 8th AM rights against cruel and unusual punishment in my eyes.
What I saw in Scott Peterson's situation, was that Lacey's family had money. Scott initially saw this as a good deal. But I think after he was married, it made him feel less empowered in the relationship. He preferred a woman less confident, less educated, which is why he cheated on Lacey with Amber. He did not want to divorce Lacey, and have to pay child support for the baby. He just wanted her gone. Not unlike Mark Hacking. Both viewed the wife as a problem.
The death penalty? I agree, probably a bit overkill.
Legally, it does matter how and why she was killed. How the body was disposed of is another question.
I've had this exact discussion with her. Neither of us are fond of the death penalty period because its irrevocable if you make a mistake. Unlike my wife, I support it in some situations. Too much is not known about this particular case for me to support it.
I get tired of posting this because too many are simply too clueless to get it. But than America is so full of lots of people who don't do much thinking these days that it makes me ashamed. The important point though is the US Supreme Court requires a long and lengthy review process before an execution can be carried out. If that bothers you, you need only think of about several dozen innocent people who were freed from death row during the last 30 years when evidence emerged that someone else had committed the crime. You can blah, blah, blah me all day long that "Scott Peterson is guilty and this is different". No it isn't different. We have to have one review process for everyone on death row. We don't make exceptions because YOU or anyone else thinks this person or that person should be an exception. I will guarantee that the issues on review in this case are deeper than whether a doctor will administer a lethal injection in California.
Sarcasm is sarcasm. Its not an argument. I have no idea how much pain Lacey felt (or didn't feel) before she was killed.
I always like your posts.
Someone left me a snarky post in the rep section, unsigned, of course. But, to address that, I don't really know if the two Petersons were guilty or not, I had doubts as the evidence was presented...... That is all I meant by saying "I had doubts...."
There was a lot of underhanded stuff that went on in the Michael Peterson trial, I thought. The DA's office had a sleeper posting on the CourtTV message board. Information was actually being passed back and forth. They were finally outed. (Named as the sister of someone who worked directly in the DA's office and around the case) The woman that wrote a book about the case had an inside pipeline to what was going on. There was a victory party held with some of the posters and a person from DA's office after the trial was over. That was neither here nor there as far as Peterson's guilt goes, but, it was a prime example of, to me, of folks that had no dog in the race getting too deeply involved in something that was none of their business and apparantly, somone in the DA's office letting it go on. I never had a lot of confidence in the female DA's objectivity about the case.
Both Peterson's may be guilty as sin, I just had questions about some of the circumstantial evidence. (so to the person who left the comment, does that satisfy you ?)
Ok, whatever, having gone to college in Calif., there are certain profiles that go with the low-GPA business major.
Surfer-golfer-waiter-frat boy combination, or some combination thereof. Then, he goes into selling fertilizer.
I just said surfer because he comes from San Diego and came off as one who might have done that in his youth. He was, however, a waiter. Almost everyone I knew in college that waited on tables in chain restaurants was glib and superficial. At least, that's what I saw.
I made the distinction because they are two different sports and require two different mind sets and physical abilities.
Not everyone in San Diego (or CA for that matter) surfs.
But, whatever, dude, just go ahead and, you know, keep on stereotyping those surfers, dude. Keeps the gremmies out of the water.
(You might also be interested in learning he had a 3.83 in college (Cal Poly) and was on the dean's list three times. Testimony from his trial.)
I made the distinction because they are two different sports and require two different mind sets and physical abilities.
Not everyone in San Diego (or CA for that matter) surfs.
But, whatever, dude, just go ahead and, you know, keep on stereotyping those surfers, dude. Keeps the gremmies out of the water.
(You might also be interested in learning he had a 3.83 in college (Cal Poly) and was on the dean's list three times. Testimony from his trial.)
Thank you. I'm from the Southland. I know that. But he could "pass" for one. Waiter was also easy to believe.
3.83 at Cal Poly? In what? So he graduated, then? A 3.83 from Cal Poly qualifies you to do something better than selling fertilizer commercially.
About the death penalty, I believe in it. Unfortunately, it is costly because it takes far too long to execute it. It's almost cheaper to re-try every death row inmate with modern technology at our disposal. If it is proven without a doubt that he/she committed the crime that he was originally charged with, he is led into the next room, and executed.
The death penalty is expensive because of the long appeals process. So, your solution is end the appeals process. Not only is this unconstitutional according to our Supreme Court it will undoubtedly result in the deaths of some people who are innocent. How many innocent people executed is an acceptable price to pay for rapid use of the death penalty? One hundred? Thirty? Twenty? Is one too many if that "one" is you or a family member?
Quote:
This applies to all gang members as well. They should all be tried as co-conspirators to commit domestic terrorism, which should carry the maximum punishment: death. If one gang member murders, they all are charged for the crime, and if convicted, they all hang. The penalty should be executed immediately. This means gang member G is convicted of killing innocent bystander B at 3pm, and by 3:30pm, G is executed. The rest of the gangmembers from G's gang are then tried as co-conspirators, convicted, and put to death within 30 minutes.
1. You'd end up executing a large number of innocent people.
2. America would execute more people than every country in this world that we label a Totalitarian State including Iran, North Korea, and China.
3. We'd be doing something that no other modern country does.
4. You'd basically have to ignore large sections of the Constitution to do what you are advocating.
5. Its just a dumb idea.
Quote:
I'd like to see the DP used to eliminate these savages, not to rehabilitate or punish. Hardcore I know. Thank God it's not up to me. People who kill, rape, maim, and violate the families, personal residences, space, peace and tranquility of innocent people don't have any 8th AM rights against cruel and unusual punishment in my eyes.
Do you feel better getting all that out now?
Its lost on this poster. However, anyone who wants a real account of an innocent person who spend eight years on death row for a crime he didn't commit ought to read "The Innocent Man" by Scott Turow. In Oklahoma, they were giving out the death penalty like it was ice cream on a hot summer day. In the process, two innocent people ended up on death row. Another got a life sentence. It took years to right these wrongs. One man died shortly after his release from death row.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And for the record, I happen to oppose the death penalty for the very reasons you stated. Too many people that are actually innocent have been put to death. I'm not quite sure where you got (from my comments) that SP should be an exception. I replied to your comment, "Peterson is unlikely to end up receiving the death penalty." Unless you are talking about his conviction and sentence being overturned on Appeal, I took your comment to mean that he hasn't received the DP yet. Perhaps our wires were crossed. I don't blah, blah, blah about anything, fyi. And, lastly ... If I cared to, I could post the Court's Decision regarding California's DP but I figure people are smart enough to look it up for them self, if they are interested. I don't insult their intelligence, as you have done mine. 
