Witnesses: Jury Wrongly Convicted Peterson

foxnews.com ^ | Tuesday, December 07, 2004 | AP

[theconservativerepublican]

The 100 people quoted in that article were released from jail. Your not released from jail because the death penalty is ruled unconstitutional.

[Howlin]

I think the lawyer is only doing what the client is demanding. (the mother)

Now on this we can agree! There is something "not right" with this family -- and she just may be at the heart of it.

Whatever they are saying is only turning the jury off; all they keep hearing is that Scott was a good golf player and that it will tear his family apart if he is given the DP.

Well, what's the jury left to think when none of them EVER say that losing Laci and Conner tore their family part? Is a family only torn apart when CERTAIN people are lost?

Anyway, not one word of this stuff has anything to do with mitigating circumstances.

[Howlin]

I think the word of the day is "diversion."

Absolutely. Spending time hoping and praying the jury will forget that Sharon Rocha said she went to say goodbye to Laci's casket and was glad that Laci was in there with Conner until she remembered she didn't have any ARMS to hold him.

[WildTurkey]

But in the purely legal sense, he is innocentfound guilty..

[Types_with_Fist]

I'm for promoting the "punishment fitting the crime" thing. I think our sea-faring friend should be taken out to sea, strung up on the highest yardarm and beaten with golf clubs. Thoughts?

[onyx]

It's humorous yes, but difficult
to wade through all the misinformation
posturing as fact posted by some truly uninformed
folks with attitudes and personal issues.

[BJungNan]

Nope, the death penalty should not be handed down in this case. Not because of the circumstances of the murder. But because of the evidence in the case.

If it is later found that he did not do it, that all the circumstantial evidence pointing in his direction was wrong, then society should have the opportunity to correct its mistake.

You have a guy in Texas that was just released after 17 years on death row for a crime even the judge in the case now says it is obvious he did not commit.

The death penalty is not something to be taken lightly, or as a matter of course as you seem to imply in your post.

[Howlin]

An old neighbor woman saw her walking her dog that morning thru the kitchen window and commented to her husband who was watching "football" on TV....(No football that day...he was actually watching pre-game coverage...to his wife, it was "Football".....but to prosecutors, that little detail shot holes in her testimony.)

Totally discredited; it says a lot about you that you keep repeating misinformation.

Other witnesses that morning saw Lacy chatting with several low-life's who were standing beside an old van near her driveway that morning....her dog still on a leash...

Absolutely NOT true.

[onyx]

That case was about a fire and no apparent motive.
That guy was railroaded.
Snott has had a million dollar defense team.

[Howlin]

Yes, it does matter; you stated as fact 400 and are unable to back that statement up.

It counts as yet another false statement you have made.

[Howlin]

It doesnt have to be only judicial errors howlin.

You're never going to get into law school.

[Howlin]

Do the aggravating factors, as found by the jury, outweigh the mitigating factors?

Have you actually heard ANY mitigating factors in this penalty phase?

[onyx]

But in the purely legal sense, he is innocent.

All I want is for my legal system to fess up and admit he was convicted because he failed as a husband and father....And that he should suffer death because of it.

To me that is fitting justice....It's a standard that I hold myself to.




TOO FUNNY.

In a totally legal verdict, he has been found GUILTY.

[najida]

That is the creepiest part of the whole story.

We have yet to hear from Scott, his family etc about how LACI's life and death and the death of the baby effected the family. It is like she never existed! That Scott is the only person they saw.

Heck, they may have killed her as a group, they are that cold blooded. /sarcasm.

[Howlin]

I hear everybody laughing now---you cant answer the question thats why you refuse.

Listen, I don't make statements I can't back up, unlike you; now we find out that you're misrepresented those facts?

I'm not hear to discuss your cases; I'm talking about the Scott Peterson case.

[Howlin]

If it is later found that he did not do it, that all the circumstantial evidence pointing in his direction was wrong,

What or where is the evidence -- ANY PIECE -- that points to anybody except Scott Peterson?

And I beg to differ about the DP; this was a premeditated crime in which he had to know that when he killed her he was killing his son.

Give him the needle.

[cyncooper]

If it can be proven that Amber was in the position to possibly make thousands--then her testimony will be in question.

Oh, dear. You say "in question" as if all one must do is pose a question, never mind "the answer", as in Amber's testimony was verified; it didn't rest on her say-so.

Next faulty point, please.

[najida]

It was discredited because she stated there was a football game on TV and there wasn't a football game on TV ON THAT DAY! So maybe she was confused?

Would you want THAT on the stand in your case? She would have been ripped into confetti.

[cyncooper]

Manson had his insane and evil reasons.