STYLETHREAD -- LET'S TALK SHOP!

Hermes

Peterson's Death Sentence Upheld

sfcaligirl · Dooney & Bourke

this guy is despicable, but i'd rather see him rot in jail than be executed.

JoceyBaby23 · Gucci

I love the fact that he is going to die for what he did.. and I also think he will have plenty of time to think about what's he done and what's coming to him.. People on death row can sit in jail for years before being executed.

Maddie · Coach

Arhghrghghhg. This is so frustrating to me. There is some VERY convincing evidence that he did kill her, but there's nothing like fingerprints on the murder weapon that make it certain that he did. Or an eyewitness. Or anything. So while I do agree he did, I am EXTREMELY uncomfortable with putting someone to death when I'm only pretty sure they did something instead of 100% positive without any possible doubt. I guess I'm just not comfortable with putting people to death at all, but especially in a situation like this. What if we're wrong?

honey · Gucci

quote:
Originally posted by: Maddie
"Arhghrghghhg. This is so frustrating to me. There is some VERY convincing evidence that he did kill her, but there's nothing like fingerprints on the murder weapon that make it certain that he did. Or an eyewitness. Or anything. So while I do agree he did, I am EXTREMELY uncomfortable with putting someone to death when I'm only pretty sure they did something instead of 100% positive without any possible doubt. I guess I'm just not comfortable with putting people to death at all, but especially in a situation like this. What if we're wrong?"

i feel the same way. i am not against the death penalty, but i think if it's used it should only be used in situations where the crime is particularly heinous and the evidence is irrefutable. i.e. i wouldn't necessarily have a problem with someone like brian nichols (the guy in atl) getting the death penalty.

however this whole peterson thing is extremely upsetting. i just feel that there is so much hoopla separate from the actual facts of this case that's influencing the decision. the whole search that took place prior, all the media coverage, the fact that the victim was a pretty middle-class white woman all played a role in the prosecutor's decision to seek the death penalty.

additionally did anyone see the press conference that the jurors held after the fact...maybe i'm an elitist snob but i wasn't exactly blown away by their decision making capabilities. especially the one they referred to as "strawberry shortcake" (aka charli baltimore). she was like this amalgamation of every rude sales associate/bank teller/dmv worker i've ever encountered (the type with a whole lot of attitude who gets upset when you actually ask them to do their job).

rosie_the_riveter · Gucci

quote:
Originally posted by: Maddie
"Arhghrghghhg. This is so frustrating to me. There is some VERY convincing evidence that he did kill her, but there's nothing like fingerprints on the murder weapon that make it certain that he did. Or an eyewitness. Or anything. So while I do agree he did, I am EXTREMELY uncomfortable with putting someone to death when I'm only pretty sure they did something instead of 100% positive without any possible doubt. I guess I'm just not comfortable with putting people to death at all, but especially in a situation like this. What if we're wrong?"

I thought that I was the only one who felt this way, I'm not trying to defend him in any way but what if he didn't do it? There was no hard evidence linking him. So my question is how does Robert Blake get off but Scott Peterson get the death penalty? And I wonder if one day evidence is found that he wasn't the killer, how would Laci's family feel after pointing the finger at him?

f413 · Kenneth Cole

Did you guys hear that during his first 24hrs on Death Row numerous women have called San Quentin (sp.?) with hopes of marrying him? According to GMA.

theotherjess · Chanel

quote:
Originally posted by: Maddie
"Arhghrghghhg. This is so frustrating to me. There is some VERY convincing evidence that he did kill her, but there's nothing like fingerprints on the murder weapon that make it certain that he did. Or an eyewitness. Or anything. So while I do agree he did, I am EXTREMELY uncomfortable with putting someone to death when I'm only pretty sure they did something instead of 100% positive without any possible doubt. I guess I'm just not comfortable with putting people to death at all, but especially in a situation like this. What if we're wrong?"

I agree.

ShanKel · Kenneth Cole

quote:
Originally posted by: f413
"Did you guys hear that during his first 24hrs on Death Row numerous women have called San Quentin (sp.?) with hopes of marrying him? According to GMA."

I also heard that he had a large fan base(like he's a celebrity or something) of women who were hoping he gets off. Where do these women come from?

The fact that he showed no emotion when he heard the verdict and the sentencing really bothers me. It definitely shows that he is a very sick man.

blink · Coach

I disagree with the death penalty for moral reasons and also for financial reasons, I do not think it successfully deters crime, but I am also not family to someone who fell victim to a murder, so my conviction of opinion is not absolute here.

If I did agree with the death penalty, I would only want it to apply in cases in which real hard evidence, like DNA or fingerprints, was presented to convict.

BUT, I also believe, obviously assuming Scott Peterson IS guilty, and my gut tells me he is, that he is just as deserving of the death pentalty as anyone else on death row for his terrible deed.

Mia · Kate Spade

I oppose the death penalty in general so obviously I am against it in this case as well, BUT I am especially against it for the same reason others have mentioned - I think Scott Peterson killed Laci, but there's no hard evidence he did. I am very uncomfortable with the death penalty in cases with no physical evidence.

MariLen · Nine West

I support the death penalty. Whether it's a deterent or not is a secondary consideration to me. I just don't think the life of a person who would do what Scott did is worth the time, effort, or money it takes to imprison for the length of his life. Still, the points made here about this case are valid I think. The crime is certinly heinous enough to warrent execution, but the evidence is a bit too flimsy for my taste. Still, he is a Rat Bastard of the first order, in the end I really don't care what happens to him, as long as it's bad.

Maddie · Coach

Actually MariLen, it is FAR less expensive to keep a criminal for life than it is to put them to death.

Renee · Kenneth Cole

quote:
Originally posted by: Maddie
"Actually MariLen, it is FAR less expensive to keep a criminal for life than it is to put them to death."

Maddie, can you please explain this?

luckylily · Gucci

I'm not Maddie, but check out deathpenaltyinfo.org for info on the costs of the death penalty. It is an anti-capital punishment site, but I believe the information is well researched.

Essentially, death penalty cases tend to generate a larger number or appeals and the cases take longer to try. They are extremely costly to the state's courts system, and the costs generally exceed the cost of keeping someone in prison.

I've stayed out of the Scott Peterson discussions thus far, but now that I'm here I might as well say that while I think SP is a completely disgusting slime ball, I also think that the death penalty is barbaric.

Renee · Kenneth Cole

Thanks for your answer, Luckylily. This is good logic, but I wonder if it actually works in the case of Peterson's trial, which is horrendously expensive and would still be if he was sentenced to prison.

I do not oppose the death penalty in principle, but, like other members here, I am very uncomfortable with the Peterson death sentence - there is just the circumstantial evidence. And while I agree that Peterson is a total scumbag, that should not mean that he should be executed without 100% proof. Another thing that bothers me is that I think there are other rapists/murderers in the California prison system that "deserve" the death penalty at least as much as Peterson does, and yet they get prison. This case is different only because of the publicity. There was a lot of lynch mob sentiment going on, and that makes me very uncomfortable.

Maddie · Coach

Renee, I don't think it's really a case by case issue. Pretty much, if the death sentence is invloved, the defendent is allowed more extensive appeals. Appeals cost more than just keeping an inmate. So even though Scott Peterson's case is already expensive, the appeals that will follow only make it more so in contrast to what is basically room and board for the rest of his life.