Am I missing something here? Those that support the right-to-life certainly are ecstatic over the fact that Connor was in fact considered a human being, and not just cellular components considered a fetus...yet at the same time how can one be ecstatic over a death sentence of a human being based on circumstantial evidence? I, for one, believe he is guilty and should be given life in prison....however, I don't believe "I" have the right to take away another human's life unless in the position of self-defense.
You've mentioned yet another problem I have with the Peterson case. Every couple of years or so, the media choose to focus it's white heat on a murder case. They invariably pronounce someone guilty, and wouldn't you just know it, that's the person the prosecutor charges. With rare exceptions, a jury eventually convicts the person the media pointed to as guilty. This has been going on since at least the days of Pulitizer, Hearst and their "yellow journalism."
Given the poor esteem most people have for the media in this, the dawn of the 21st Century, one would think we'd have long since figured out the media's game when it comes to sensationalizing any given murder case. But no. If anything, we're even more subject to their manipulation and to mob mentality than ever before.
You're right. Exactly what hard evidence exists that points to Peterson's guilt?