regarding the peterson verdict

[Derek Ortt]

1. That second degree charge will likely not ever stand up. It contradicts Roe vs Wade by stating that the fetus is life

2. The entire verdict may not stand up since jurors were dismissed during deliberations and the jury was instructed to start again from scratch. As quick as they went today, they likely did not follow the judges instructions.

IMO, this case is likely to be overturned on appeal and a new trial ordered

[CaptinCrunch]

I'm thinking the same thing

[GalvestonDuck]

1. That second degree charge will likely not ever stand up. It contradicts Roe vs Wade by stating that the fetus is life.

I thought he was prosecuted under the Unborn Victims of Violence Act [THANK YOU, GEORGE BUSH!] (when an assault or murder is committed against a pregnant woman that results in the death of her unborn child, the accused will be charged with the murder of the baby, as well as the murder of the mother if she dies).

[Derek Ortt]

that law still violates roe v wade since a fetus is not a person. Under that law, an abortion can be murder. Besides, even if that law were to apply, wouldn't that be a federal law that would have to be prosecuted in federal court, outside of the jurisdiction of California; thus, the conviction would be overturned due to california overstepping its jurisdiction

[GalvestonDuck]

that law still violates roe v wade since a fetus is not a person. Under that law, an abortion can be murder.

Not really (although I agree abortion is murder), since most pro-abortionists would argue that it's not same since it's an assault on a pregnant woman. She's consenting to the act.

Besides, even if that law were to apply, wouldn't that be a federal law that would have to be prosecuted in federal court, outside of the jurisdiction of California; thus, the conviction would be overturned due to california overstepping its jurisdiction

I don't know. I read something several weeks ago about the case and that that's the reason they were prosecuting him for Connor's death also.

[Derek Ortt]

let me get this straight.

if the woman consents to the murder, it isnt a murder? What kind of CS civilization do we live in. Based upon that logic, I should be able to kill whoever I want to, as long as I consent to the act.

This is why we need to get rid of all activist judges, so that disputes over the legality of killing a fetus yourself or through an assult do not have to be micromanaged.

Also, I have heard of these cases even before the Bush legislation, so there is some hypocracy that the liberal courts of California (the same ones that said the pledge was unconstitutional even though the plaintiff didn not have the authority to sue) will almost certainly strike down

[tronbunny]

wow..this may belong in the political forum.
But even murder of a pet animal is punishable by serious sentences..depending upon the law..
So the unborn victims of violence act is still valid and such a violent act could be considered punishable by death under our constitution.
yes, I just equated the act of aborting a pregnancy to the slaughter of an "animal".
flame away.

[GalvestonDuck]

let me get this straight.

if the woman consents to the murder, it isnt a murder? What kind of CS civilization do we live in. Based upon that logic, I should be able to kill whoever I want to, as long as I consent to the act.

This is why we need to get rid of all activist judges, so that disputes over the legality of killing a fetus yourself or through an assult do not have to be micromanaged.

Also, I have heard of these cases even before the Bush legislation, so there is some hypocracy that the liberal courts of California (the same ones that said the pledge was unconstitutional even though the plaintiff didn not have the authority to sue) will almost certainly strike down

Derek, I'm on the same side you are in regards to abortion. I'm just saying that this particular law involved the death of an unborn child that comes about as the result of assault on the pregnant woman (whether she dies or not).

If the woman has signed a consent form for the medical procedure (as pro-abortionists like to call it), it's not an assault on her body, so in that case, the law doesn't apply. Besides, the only way police know about an assault or murder is if it is reported or discovered. Most women probably don't report abortions in that way.

[Derek Ortt]

but where I am confused is if it is an assault on just her body, then why is the murder of another person an applicable charge, instead of the single count of assault. This is giving me some confusion

[michaelwmoss]

Scott Peterson is going to get exactly what he deserves. I can't imagine anyone (Including Scott) wanting to drag this out any longer. She looked like such a sweet and funloving person to be around.

I am pro-life, and I believe Abortion is murder and that the fetus is a human being.

People want crazy things to be legalized all of the time. Like many want Prositution legalized. The attitude I commonly hear is "Well people are going to do it anyway, so why not make it legal, take a load off of the police, and tax it somehow" GEEZ! "People are going to KILL people anyway, so we should make that legal?"

[Derek Ortt]

the killing of Connor should be illegal. However, IMO, due to RvW and thanks to our activist court out in California, there is about zero chance of that ever holding up

[michaelwmoss]

Derek are you talking about the Verdict holding up>?

[Derek Ortt]

yeah, I think there is zero chance of the second degree against connor holding up

[Cookiely]

1. That second degree charge will likely not ever stand up. It contradicts Roe vs Wade by stating that the fetus is life

2. The entire verdict may not stand up since jurors were dismissed during deliberations and the jury was instructed to start again from scratch. As quick as they went today, they likely did not follow the judges instructions.

IMO, this case is likely to be overturned on appeal and a new trial ordered

1. I don't believe Roe vs. Wade has anything to do with a viable baby. This child was ready to be born. If Laci had been induced, Connor would have survived. Also, having a child murdered against your will has nothing to do with consent. What I have a problem with is the jury not giving first degree for Connor. When SP murdered Laci, he had to know that Connor would die and if he had called paramedics then Connor might have lived, therefore he also wanted and planned for Connor to die.
2. The reason they have alternates is in the event of the dismissal of a juror including the deliberation phase. The first juror was released because she researched material on the internet during the five months of the trial which is against the rules. I believe the JDMD "ratted on her" and this was a source of friction with the rest of the jurors. I can understand the JDMD's position as he is an attorney and once he knew that she had broken the law, he felt that he had no choice but to turn her in, or face possible loss of his license if this was later revealed. She was leaning toward a guilty verdict. The reasons for the dismissal of the JDMD is sealed but my theory is that when he was ousted as foreperson his ego was damaged and "he didn't want to play anymore". If anyone had wanted to go through the testimony of a five month trial item by item has some serious issues and was causing trouble with the jury. Initially I thought he would make a good juror but after I learned he had taken twelve notebooks full of notes on the trial, it made my hair stand up. Judge Delucchi has only had one appeal overturned in all his years on the bench and I don't feel the appeals court is going to want to foot another five million dollar trial. I believe in the death penalty for certain cases and this is certainly one of them.

[yoda]

I see this case being overturned and retried. There are too many things here that can be used in a possible appeal.

[j]

I don't want to get into the whole R v W thing...he killed a baby TOO..period!

What I think is the most rediculous aspect of this whole verdict is you turn in a Murder in the 1st degree against Laci, but somehow you rationalize that he didn't INTEND to kill Conner, and award a 2nd degree conviction.

Sorry baby killing non-sympathizers...this is murder #1 in BOTH cases. Can't be one way and not the other.


Sorry for my "harshness", but I see this as an extension of the whole free wheeling pro abortion issue, which is prevalent amongst the California ultra Liberal crowd.

[alicia-w]

I dont see where abortion has ANYTHING to do with the Scott Peterson case. This creep murdered his pregnant wife. He had to know that the baby would die too. I believe that's what makes it 2nd degree. As for the dismissal of jurors during deliberations being grounds for an appeal.... there are jurors dismissed all the time. The defense lawyer did not object to the dismissals, so to use that as a cause for appeal seems lame at best.

[j]

Apparently, the difference between 1st degree and 2nd degree is premeditation. Lets see if I have this right:

He buys a boat, makes up some anchors, plans the fishing/body dumping trip, which by all means points to premeditation. But.....in his rush to kill his wife, and rid himself of THAT obligation, he totally forgot that he had a baby soon to be born. All is forgiven...he forgot, therefore the murder of Conner is not pre meditated.

Now I understand

As far as what this has to do with abortion? I t has everything to do with abortion. Consider the following:

- Conner was not yet born.

- You can only murder a human being.

- Conner was murdered, therefore he was a human being.

- A human being has rights.

- Therefore, an unborn child is a human being with rights that should be protected.

[alicia-w]

"The judge would be derelict in his duty if he didn't instruct on both first and second-degree murder," said former San Mateo County prosecutor Dean Johnson. "Both crimes are clearly supported by the evidence."
Like first-degree murder, second-degree requires proof that a killing was intentional and done with "malice aforethought" — meaning the perpetrator knew or should have known the deadly consequences of his or her act.

But second-degree murder does not require proof of premeditation or deliberation, which is defined as "careful thought and weighing of considerations for and against the proposed course of action."

If Peterson is convicted of first-degree in the slayings of his wife, Laci, and unborn son, he would be sentenced to either death or life in prison without the possibility of parole.

Second-degree murder carries a sentence of 15 years to life.

Middle ground

Without the second-degree option, jurors are faced with a stark choice between acquittal and capital conviction, but the lesser charge gives a divided jury a chance for compromise.

"Instead of a situation where reasonable doubt on the part of a few jurors leads to a hung jury, the minority jurors holding out for an acquittal can be bullied into a second-degree conviction and still puff up their chests at the end and feel like they stood up for justice," said defense attorney Dan Horowitz, who has tried four murder cases in front of Delucchi.

http://www.courttv.com/trials/peterson/102704_ctv.html

[j]

while we are on the abortion topic...

The ONLY difference between that baby Conner that was inside Laci, and a new born baby, is the new born baby suddenly has its lungs filled with air. PERIOD!...The only difference. Still can't survive on its own, needs its Mother just like it has for the last 9 months!