Bye Bye Scott (Yahoo-AP)

[geezer]

But why? Because it's "right?" "Fair?" Makes you feel good to make a bad person suffer? Because it's wrong for someone to cause another person pain and not suffer pain themselves?

Because I lack that "thing" that makes some people believe that all life is sacred. You fuck up bad enough, and I have no problem with your life becoming forfeit. You want to skip out on your relationship by killing your wife and unborn child? Fuck off. You get to look forward to 200cc of liquid retribution.

You have a problem with that, I don't. I don't know where to go from there.

The funny this is, I *don't* think all life is sacred. I don't even know if I believe in "sacred." I simply think that we should strive to better ourselves, and by succumbing to out base instinct to revenge and punish, I believe we fail in that betterment. I guess it's a matter of humanistic principle for me.

[gbasden]

I no longer have to worry about people being convicted in a world without DNA evidence. If we fried innocent people in 1947, that's not my problem, nor is it necessarily a reason to not fry guilty people in 2005.

This is true, however there are still a lot of people on death row whose trials occured before the prevalence of DNA testing.

I'll let Mr. Fed deal with the "only circumstantial evidence" portion of your comment.

And just to be clear, I don't have a problem convicting someone on circumstantial evidence. I just don't think they should get the needle if we don't have more conclusive proof..

Is the size of the subset 0? 1? 950? Your threshold may be any number greater than 0. My threshold may be any number less than 10. Neither one of us is right. In aggregate, we determine the appropriate number, which seems to be some number greater than 0.

Yep - that's where opinions differ. I believe that it's worth forgoing the death penalty in some questionable cases in order to bring that number to as close to 0 as possible.

Kudos to the Innocence Project. But that doesn't tell us how many of the 956 executions were of innocent people.

And I'll point out that Barry Scheck (one of the two head dudes at the Innocence Project) was part of the team that got OJ exonerated. Not so much a "hooray" on that one.

Well, given that those 157 people proven innocent were already tried and sentenced, and the only reason they were freed was because of an extra-judicial group that paid for DNA testing and investigation out of their own pocket, I'd say that without them a large percentage of those 157 people would have gotten the axe.

And I think we can agree that defense lawyers are a necessary evil - If, god forbid, I'm ever charged with a crime, I certainly don't want to have to defend myself in an unfamiliar environment where I don't know all the rules.

As long as we catch them while they are still on Death Row, and not in a pine box - they don't count. They are examples of the system working, not of the system failing.

You have to make it through the cracks to count as a failure.

Again, *the system* failed. It took a third party to stand up and investigate to prove these people's innocence. And given the proven incompetance of many public defenders in death penalty cases, it's not too surprising that the error rate is as high as it is.

Nice. Who do we take our deal to for ratification?

Dunno - ABC?

[RunningMn9]

Yes, there is. It's better that he spends the rest of his life rotting away in prison than that we give the state the right to kill its citizens. You pick out these sensational, "live on CNN" cases as if they're typical, but the reality is most death row offenders didn't shoot a judge in front of dozens of witnesses.

We aren't giving "the State" anything. The citizens decided that it's ok to kill certain kinds of criminals, and it's their business to decide who gets to die.

Not "the State".

I picked out this particular savage because there isn't any doubt at ALL to his guilt. That seemed to satisfy Guido's threshold of 0% doubt.

I'm left wondering if Guido is on the "Fry that Asshole" bandwagon.


geezer:

The funny this is, I *don't* think all life is sacred. I don't even know if I believe in "sacred." I simply think that we should strive to better ourselves, and by succumbing to out base instinct to revenge and punish, I believe we fail in that betterment. I guess it's a matter of humanistic principle for me.

You should know by now that I'm a big believer in embracing our humanity - the good and the bad. I have no desire to "improve" or "rise above" ourselves.

[Mr. Fed]

We aren't giving "the State" anything. The citizens decided that it's ok to kill certain kinds of criminals, and it's their business to decide who gets to die.

Not "the State".

Really? I suppose you could say that's true to the extent that we elect District Attorneys and elect judges (or elect Presidents or governors (in some states) who appoint them and elect legislators. To that extent, "the citizens" decide who lives or who dies when you step back far enough.

But if you are standing closer, the DAs (usually) and the Attorney General's death committee (sometimes) decide which killers we try to kill and which we don't.

[GuidoTKP]

I picked out this particular savage because there isn't any doubt at ALL to his guilt. That seemed to satisfy Guido's threshold of 0% doubt.

I'm left wondering if Guido is on the "Fry that Asshole" bandwagon.

When I have a sec, I intend to respond to your long post, but I can hit this one quickly. I'm satisfied this animal did the killings. In general it doesn't change my mind that the death penalty isn't worth all of the questions it raises in terms of its general enforcement. I could bear the thought of this guy being thrown in the pokey for the rest of his life, rather than be executed, given the concerns I outlined in my email.

That being said, I wouldn't shed a tear if this guy got the needle. If you're going to bother to have the death penalty, this is poster child for state-sanctioned killings.

[RunningMn9]

Really? I suppose you could say that's true to the extent that we elect District Attorneys and elect judges (or elect Presidents or governors (in some states) who appoint them and elect legislators. To that extent, "the citizens" decide who lives or who dies when you step back far enough.

It's true to the extent that District Attorneys and judges and Presidents and governors and legislators are citizens too. In some cases, they are people we've selected to be instruments of our collective death penalty supporting will. We have selection criteria and we have people that we put in charge of the process. It's more efficient that way.

It's just a pet peeve of mine when people refer to "the State" as some anonymous entity that isn't just a collection of citizens carrying out their interpretations of our collective will (interpretations that are generally voted on at some interval).

Since it's impractical to give direct control over the decision to 292 million people, we settle for special intermediaries who do the job for us.


Evil Lawyer #2:

I'm satisfied this animal did the killings. In general it doesn't change my mind that the death penalty isn't worth all of the questions it raises in terms of its general enforcement. I could bear the thought of this guy being thrown in the pokey for the rest of his life, rather than be executed, given the concerns I outlined in my email.

Alright, that clarifies things for me. Your initial post seemed a bit wishy-washy over whether you had a problem with the death penalty if guilt is known absolutely.

[The Mad Hatter]

Really? I suppose you could say that's true to the extent that we elect District Attorneys and elect judges (or elect Presidents or governors (in some states) who appoint them and elect legislators. To that extent, "the citizens" decide who lives or who dies when you step back far enough.

It's true to the extent that District Attorneys and judges and Presidents and governors and legislators are citizens too. In some cases, they are people we've selected to be instruments of our collective death penalty supporting will. We have selection criteria and we have people that we put in charge of the process. It's more efficient that way.

It's just a pet peeve of mine when people refer to "the State" as some anonymous entity that isn't just a collection of citizens carrying out their interpretations of our collective will (interpretations that are generally voted on at some interval).

Since it's impractical to give direct control over the decision to 292 million people, we settle for special intermediaries who do the job for us.

Call it the state, call it the collective will, call it whatever you want - it should not have the power to kill individuals regardless of their crimes. Lock them up for life yes, execution no.

[RunningMn9]

Call it the state, call it the collective will, call it whatever you want - it should not have the power to kill individuals regardless of their crimes. Lock them up for life yes, execution no.

I repeat, I say we vote on it.

[Anonymous Bosch]

Considering that old age is the leading cause of death on death row in California, I think it's pretty much a moot point.

Scott Peterson didn't really get a death sentence; he got a life sentence of repetitious boredom and safety.

[Mr. Fed]

Call it the state, call it the collective will, call it whatever you want - it should not have the power to kill individuals regardless of their crimes. Lock them up for life yes, execution no.

I repeat, I say we vote on it.

We'll get right on it. Right after we finish the voting on whether to teach your kids Intelligent Design in their science classes.

[RunningMn9]

We'll get right on it. Right after we finish the voting on whether to teach your kids Intelligent Design in their science classes.

Curses! This is why you are Evil Lawyer #1, you know how to hurt me.

Although, truth be told, I really couldn't care less if Ohioans want to teach there kids about ID. That's a problem for Ohioans. If it comes up for a vote in NJ, or nationally, then it's time to start the revolution.

How dare you uncover the hypocrisy of what I choose to be Democratic about and what I choose to be Totalitarian about. How dare you, sir?

[Exodor]

Scott Peterson didn't really get a death sentence; he got a life sentence of repetitious boredom and safety.

He's going to be forced to live my life?

Poor bastard.

[knob]

I vote yes. Because if he isn't executed, I run the risk of having to hear about this case for another year.


It sucks, Lil' Conner died. But so do many other people. No reason I should have to listen to this on an almost daily basis.

[Isgrimnur]

CNN

California's Supreme Court on Monday reversed the death sentence handed down to Scott Peterson for the 2002 deaths of his wife Laci and unborn son.

The high court found that the trial itself was fair and the murder convictions stand.

In an automatic appeal, which was first filed with the Supreme Court in 2012, the court found that potential jurors were dismissed erroneously, in part because they expressed general objections to the death penalty on a questionnaire.

"While a court may dismiss a prospective juror as unqualified to sit on a capital case if the juror's views on capital punishment would substantially impair his or her ability to follow the law, a juror may not be dismissed merely because he or she has expressed opposition to the death penalty as a general matter," the opinion states.

Nothing in the questionnaires showed that the dismissed jurors would have been unable to vote for the death penalty if the the circumstances warranted, the justices said.

"The death sentence must be reversed, and the People given another opportunity to seek that penalty before a properly selected jury if they so choose," the opinion said.

The case has been remanded to Stanislaus County Superior Court to handle the sentencing.
...
John Goold, spokesperson for the Stanislaus County District Attorney's Office, said, "We are reviewing the decision and will discuss with the victim's family." The district attorney's office has not said whether it will seek the death penalty again.

In 2019, Gov. Gavin Newsom issued a moratorium on the death penalty. The moratorium is only in effect while Newsom is in office.

California hasn't executed an inmate since 2006.

[Jeff V]

Seems California isn't taking advantage of the current times. They can string him up in the cell, shiv him 1000 times, burn the carcass in a forest fire, then announce he died of Covid.

[Z-Corn]

Don't forget about the ass-rape first...

[Isgrimnur]

CBS News

The California Supreme Court has ordered a second look at Scott Peterson's conviction for killing his pregnant wife and unborn son, less than two months after it overturned his death penalty. The court sent the case back to San Mateo County Superior Court to determine whether Peterson should receive a new trial, the Los Angeles Times reported.

The court said a juror committed "prejudicial misconduct" by failing to disclose that she had been involved with other legal proceedings. The juror had filed a lawsuit in 2000 to obtain a restraining order after her boyfriend's ex-girlfriend harassed her while she was pregnant, the Times said.

The juror said she feared for her unborn child. Yet when asked as a potential juror whether she had ever been a crime victim or involved in a lawsuit, she answered no, Peterson's attorneys told the Times.

The Modesto Bee reported that the California Supreme Court made the ruling Tuesday in response to Peterson's petition for habeas corpus filed in 2015.

[Pyperkub]

Wow. Haven't seen a yankeeman84 post bubble up in a long time.

[El Guapo]

Wow. Haven't seen a yankeeman84 post bubble up in a long time.

I know! Any idea what happened to him?

[Jaymann]

Wow. Haven't seen a yankeeman84 post bubble up in a long time.

I know! Any idea what happened to him?

Yankees got beat by the Red Sox and he became a hermit.

[El Guapo]

Wow. Haven't seen a yankeeman84 post bubble up in a long time.

I know! Any idea what happened to him?

Yankees got beat by the Red Sox and he became a hermit.

Fair enough.

[Pyperkub]

Saw him on xBox live periodically for awhile after he dropped off the forum, but that's about it. Nothing in about a decade I don't think.

[Isgrimnur]

NBC News

California prosecutors disclosed Friday they will seek the death penalty, again, against convicted killer Scott Peterson, two months after his capital sentence was overturned.

[Hrothgar]

Saw him on xBox live periodically for awhile after he dropped off the forum, but that's about it. Nothing in about a decade I don't think.

I was very confused for a moment. I thought this was referring to Scott Peterson.

[Jaymann]

Saw him on xBox live periodically for awhile after he dropped off the forum, but that's about it. Nothing in about a decade I don't think.

I was very confused for a moment. I thought this was referring to Scott Peterson.

How do you know he's not a master of Rainbow Six Siege?

[Isgrimnur]

Saw him on xBox live periodically for awhile after he dropped off the forum, but that's about it. Nothing in about a decade I don't think.

I was very confused for a moment. I thought this was referring to Scott Peterson.

How do you know he's not a master of Rainbow Six Siege?

He strikes me more as an Ultimate Fishing Simulator kinda guy.

[Hrothgar]

Saw him on xBox live periodically for awhile after he dropped off the forum, but that's about it. Nothing in about a decade I don't think.

I was very confused for a moment. I thought this was referring to Scott Peterson.

How do you know he's not a master of Rainbow Six Siege?

He strikes me more as an Ultimate Fishing Simulator kinda guy.

Here I thought he was Twitch streaming Among Us, but who would trust him?

[Isgrimnur]

CNN

Scott Peterson has been re-sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole for the deaths of his wife and unborn child, a California judge ruled Wednesday.

[El Guapo]

Saw him on xBox live periodically for awhile after he dropped off the forum, but that's about it. Nothing in about a decade I don't think.

I was very confused for a moment. I thought this was referring to Scott Peterson.

How do you know he's not a master of Rainbow Six Siege?

He strikes me more as an Ultimate Fishing Simulator kinda guy.

Here I thought he was Twitch streaming Among Us, but who would trust him?

Every time this thread pops back up I do spend ~ 5 - 10 seconds wondering "wait a minute, Yankeeman84 wasn't Scott Peterson, was he?"