Posted on 12/14/2004 6:11:16 AM PST by KMC1
THE RIGHT CALL: There will be a lot said and written about the verdict in the Scott Petersen case. There will be a lot written and said about the sentence. So what should I say?
I am no legal eagle - I don't pretend to be. But in cases like this one - where I was only surface-level aware of the day to day events I didn't really "plug in" until the very end.
It seems to me that the guilty verdict came off to some legal "experts" as a surprise.
"No physical evidence" is the phrase that is heard most often.
The other side screams, "MOUNTAINS of circumstantial".
In my mind the latter seems more relevant than the former. And even more so it is because of what the "circumstances" SAY about Scott that I believe ultimately did him in.
The amoral amongst us want us to not view the world in absolutes. Nothing is ever fully "wrong" or "right". "There is no such thing as good and evil," is what they tell us.
But common sense dictates something else.
Here is a man who had taken an oath before God to "love, cherish, and be faithful to - till death do us part." (BTW - the 'love and cherish' clause precludes the option of HIM being allowed to be the one to cause the death...)
Here is a man - who rightly under California law - had a greater responsibility to protect his wife. And when a man's wife carries the son of that man - the responsibility is heightened.
For most TRUE men - the bearing of a son is a highlight of life. To pass on your name, legacy, reputation - through your actual DNA, flesh and blood - is there anything that men have ever longed for more?
The legacy of Scott Petersen will be a statement about the times in which we live. His lack of restraint in his sexual cravings for the moment eventually led him to make the choice to exterminate his future.
Society's rightful response to someone who acts with such contempt for the lives of others - especially others for whom he bears responsibility for - is sickening.
The jury got this one right.
This is an excerpt, to read more click here...
Did "cold" Scott think that the loss of Laci and Connor would be "no big deal" in the world WE live in.... that the family would be sad but couldn't do anything.
Kudos to the Judge and the Jurors!!!!!
I am not opposed to a death penalty.
I think one should be able to convict a murderer on circumstantial evidence.
I also think that the death penalty should not be imposed without at least 2 eyewitnesses and/or certifying physical evidence.
If lesser evidence is all that's available, then I'm fine with a life sentence. (I prefer "at hard labor.")
Laci's family was wonderful. At the start, they organized the massive searches, they kept the media spotlight on finding the missing Laci, and then they kept the media spotlight on Scott. Laci had the husband from hell, but her family came through for justice.
Scott Petersen, a poster boy for retroactive abortion.
Those bodies ARE physical evidence.
If those two people didn't see Scott and if those bodies didn't emerge, Scott would be "Free" as there would be no definite connection between the location of the bodies and Scott's whereabouts.
He said he had gone fishing. That was spread across national TV PRIOR to the finding of the bodies.
The statement "she's not there" could have been his real belief.
All that is said simply to say that you have presented me with circumstantial evidence and not with physical evidence and not with eyewitnesses to the crime.
I do think he's guilty.
But I would prefer the death penalty arbitrarily by law had those 2 standards.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.