NEWS: Scott Peterson Sentenced to Death

The jury in the Scott Peterson double-murder case returned with a unanimous recommendation of the death penalty via lethal injection. After a sequestered weekend without deliberations, the jury returned to the Redwood City courthouse this morning and requested a review of 13 pieces of evidence, including autopsy photos of the victims. Shortly thereafter, it was announced they had reached a verdict. A two hour break was called, and court resumed with the verdict passed at 1:50pm PST. Peterson was convicted on November 12th of murdering his wife Laci and their unborn son Connor. The judge is exptected to concur with the recommendation and formally sentence Peterson on February 25th. There will be an automatic appeals process.



A news conference will be held with all 12 members of the jury this afternoon.

In addition to the evidence review, each juror was interviewed one by one by Judge Alfred A. Delucchi regarding "something that had happened" over the weekend. Peterson, his attorney, and the DA were present at these interviews.

The jury found Peterson guilty of first degree murder in the death of his wife and second degree murder in the death of Connor.


[edit on 15-12-2004 by Banshee]

From all the evidence, and all his weird behaviours since Laci was missing, I feel that he is guilty, and from the brutality of his crime, that poor baby would have lived if born instead of killed, I support this death penalty, and no I'm not a republican.

I'd like to hear other members' comments on the Defense in this case. It just doesn't seem that Geragos gave a very compelling defense. In fact, he gave promises in the begining of the trial with his opening statement which he did not follow through with. Geragos wasn't even in the court room for Peterson's verdict. Geragos is a high dollar attorney, what caused him to 'drop the ball' in this case? Any other opinions?

Death was too good for this fella, IMHO. He'll be separated from the general population and may even live a long life (given California's Death row).

what goes around comes around !

Originally posted by SourGrapes

Death was too good for this fella, IMHO. He'll be separated from the general population and may even live a long life (given California's Death row).

I agree. While he deserves to rot for what he did... I think they should throw him in prison and let other inmates take care of him rather than killing him.

There are some that i wouldn't mind paying the taxes to keep them alive and suffering rather than dead...
he is not one of them... he is not worth a dime to me... sooner killed, sooner dead... sooner the family can get past this senseless crime...
tragedy can not be made better, just suffering shortened.

That's sort of odd, a Californian jury giving someone the death sentence. I guess not everyone in California is an aging-liberal-hippy.

The death penalty is too pleasant for a lunatic like this, he should be locked away for the rest of his life, living with the knowlage of what he's done. But it makes you wonder; why would someone do this? Why would anyone do something as bad as this. Humans weren't born with the capacity to do something so heinous, they only do it if their life experiences has turned them into a twisted person, or if they have some serious mental problems.

I'd just like to say this to all of you who support the death penalty: It won't solve anything.

People will still commit crimes, people will still kill other people, and people will still keep on hating.

1. the death penalty is not a republican belief although many do agree with it.


2. while I have no problem with Peterson being put to death, the truth is, a better lawyer should have got him off. Again, I don't doubt that he did it but the evidence is not very compelling. If he wasn't found near the border with blonde hair and a lot of cash he might have walked.

3. He wasn't sentenced to death. The jury recommended the death penalty. A judge will decide his fate.

Originally posted by Crakeur
3. He wasn't sentenced to death. The jury recommended the death penalty. A judge will decide his fate.

Right but this judge is KNOWN to uphold the jury's decision. And for him to overrule their decision will cause him to admit that he, the judge was at fault, for even giving the option of the death penalty. So it is highly unlikely that it wont' be upheld. JMO of course.

Justus

Wonder how much money the Networks generated on this one?

I was astonished to see on Court Tv how many people were there today not to mention people watching at home and most probably at work to. Bigger than a Ozzfest or Van Halen Concert

Lets jump into the fringe for a moment

Now this is an assumption but Im willing to bet im 72% correct on it. Im willing to bet Judge Alfred A. Delucchi is a devout Roman Catholic which is neither good nor bad in of itself. So my tiny mind decided to run with a hobby of mine, symbolism.

I went to my In this day in history site im fond of and decided to take a ride on the time machine to the sentencing date Febuary 25th and heres what I found.





www.scopesys.com...
World : Brotherhood Day (1934) - - - - - ( Sunday )

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Religious Observances
Christian : Feast of St Avertanus & Bl Romeo
Roman Catholic : Commemoration of St Matthias the Apostle (leap years)
Roman Catholic : Commemoration of St Walburga, abbess
Orthodox : Commemoration of St Tarasius, patriarch of Constantinople
Lutheran : Commemoration of Elizabeth Fedde, deaconess,
Jewish : Fast of Esther (Adar 13, 5762 AM)

My point.... am I supposed to have one?

Let me ask this... emotion aside.... was there really any physical evidence to link him? Or did he get convicted for being nothing more than an a**hole? Did they ever figure out how she died? Was there any murder weapon? Blood in the house? Anything? Anything besides him being a jerk? I mean its pretty obvious he wasn't getting her on that little boat with anchors and dumping her over the edge without tipping the boat over. I think he'll get this overturned on appeal.

Indy- he's going to fry on cincumstancial evidence. That's when all fingers and all actions point to the culprit.
And there's plenty of it.

What is the circumstantial evidence? He had a boat and she was found in water? He was having an affair and didn't seem to care. Thats about it. Right? For that you can convict someone of murder and sentence them to death?

Originally posted by dgtempe
Indy- he's going to fry on cincumstancial evidence. That's when all fingers and all actions point to the culprit.
And there's plenty of it.

Hes not going to fry at all. He gets the way to humane lethal injection. Morphine, Pottassium, and pancuronium. At any rate, the local news radio carried the interview with three of the jurors and most seemed to feel that all of the evidence presented was pretty damming not to mention his actions.

He did it, he deserves to die, justice is done (after about 15 years of appeals)

niceeee
hopefully we can all continue with our lives, besides i think if he didnt get the death penalty it would not be good fir him. Hed get killed by some guy in prison.

For me if you want to convict someone of murder you better come up with some hard evidence. Especially muder in the first degree. They didn't want the jurors reaching a verdict based on fact. They wanted the jurors to reach a verdict based on emotion. You have a dead baby. Someone has to take the rap for it. And since they didn't have any good leads they had to pin in on the jerk off husband.

Think about this. Unless you have a perfect relationship with your spouse that can be verfied by a number of sources you will most likely take the blame and be convicted of his/her murder if they are unable to find anyone else to blame it on. For anyone else they need hard evidence. To nail a spouse they only need weak circumstantial evidence.

Lets pretend you are the guy. And you and your wife are having problems. Maybe you have someone on the side. And your wife ends up dead for whatever reason. Unless they find the person in the act of killing her or a murder weapon with someone elses prints all over it you WILL be convicted. It doesn't matter. You better hope you are in a foreign country when it happens because you will NOT get a fair trial.

You were having problems and had a woman on the side. Motive!
No murder weapon found. You weren't in China when the murder took place. GUILTY.

Its sad when our justice system had degraded to that level. There was absolute reasonable doubt in Peterson's case. No evidence. Can't be any more reasonable than that.

Originally posted by SourGrapes
I'd like to hear other members' comments on the Defense in this case. It just doesn't seem that Geragos gave a very compelling defense.

I agree with SourGrapes, the defense in this case was pathetic! Geragos never even presented all the "evidence" he claimed he would. I guess that's because there wasn't anything that could have been presented to show his innocence! The Peterson family spent a considerable sum of money on the defense team. I believe they sold off what they could and mortgaged their home, etc. They have to be completely devastated by this decision. They will lose their son, after losing their daughter-in-law and grandson and they're now way over their heads in debt too.
I do believe Scott Peterson is guilty and deserves death.

Has it occured to anyone that Geragos had come to believe his client was guilty?? It seem like his heart wasn't in it toward the end.....of course with out the cameras in there we can't be sure.

I think he will probably live longer on death row than he would have if he were mixed into the general prison population.....he is too 'pretty', abuse or suicide would have done him in sooner.

Originally posted by frayed1
Has it occured to anyone that Geragos had come to believe his client was guilty?? It seem like his heart wasn't in it toward the end.....of course with out the cameras in there we can't be sure.

Those are my thoughts as well. Geragos just didn't seem to fight very hard for his client. (I sure didn't see a million dollar defense! Then again, I wasn't in the courtroom.)

Possibly, between two guilty clients he once represented (Michael Jackson being the other), he chose the one that wouldn't kill his career even if he lost. (IMO)

what i found compelling was that the place where he will be held until he is put to death has a rather ironic location. He will be kept in solitary confinment except for one hour when he can go out and excerise. the place where they have the inmates exercise is 300 ft. from the place where laci was found. and Court TV said that in the room where they put the people to death there is a little window that overlooks that bay where laci was found. so now when he goes outside for that one hour a day he will be 300 ft. away from what sealed his fate. and when he dies that bay will be one of the last things he sees. sucks to be him

digitalgrl