Case closed for Scott Peterson?

Status
Not open for further replies.
K

kiyoung80

Registered Member
So far, I'm not impressed with the evidence presented by the prosecution. Yes there's plenty of circumstantial evidence, but nothing really concrete (no pun intended) to convict him of the charges. It's a shame because I do feel that he's guilty as sin, but it just seems that they let the defense have it easy. What I think would have been great to have seen would be Court TV's anchorwoman, Nancy Grace, against Scott Peterson. From what I've read, she has a perfect record of nearly 100 felony convictions at trial - and no losses while she worked as a prosecutor in Atlanta.

What does everyone here think? Do you think we'll have yet another killer walking free?

Court TV gives the most extensive trial coverage during the day, but I'm at work until 6pm usually. From what I hear though, during the closing arguments (which start on Monday, 11/1) they are going to give Nancy Grace her own 2-hour show from 6pm-8pm to review that day's events. That kind of works perfectly for me, and hopefully will give us some insite on what's going on that courtroom.

Kimberly
 
I haven't actually watched any of the trial, and I've avoided CourtTV strenuously, as is my habit. Additionally, I've fled Larry King and Dan Abrams because, frankly, I think they're overplaying the story.

I no longer care whether or not he's actually guilty, though. It's strange. Usually I bear some sentiment no matter how removed I am.

Actually, I take that back. I do hope he's guilty, because if he's not, the police have wasted how much time, and the prosecutors have spent twenty-one weeks or some-such dragging the wrong person through a trial? Hell, by an ethical system derived from my parents' teaching, I could simply say that this is what Scott deserves, anyway. If he wasn't such a bastard, he wouldn't be so easily suspected. But if he's legitimately not guilty, that would mean the truly guilty party has a two-year headstart and will probably never be caught. So in that sense, I strangely hope he's guilty. Which brings up another conundrum, which may be the source of my superficial dispassion.

Like I said, I haven't watched any of the trial. What analysis I've seen points to something similar to the OJ Simpson trial inasmuch as if he's guilty, and if the analysis I've heard is correct, he should walk, anyway.

I mean, even I think OJ's guilty. But I watched that trial, and no, I would not have convicted him. (Conspiracy theories and race cards actually don't figure into it that much; between the ice cream, the knife in the envelope, the dog barking, and something else that escapes me this long after the fact, reasonable doubt was established, even though I believe he's guilty.)

So, yeah. I hope he's guilty, and I hope they nail him. But he should walk if the holes I'm hearing in the analysis prove out.
 
Kim i ain't watched it either..but tell us about it..what you have seen.....what the prosecution is going on.
 
Not to sound cold-hearted or anything, but…how is this even news? Husbands kill (or are suspected of killing) their wives all the time. What makes this story special?
 
I agree with Nasor.

Sensationalist 'news' is helping to erode out knowledge of current events.
When the Kobe story fell through, A year of conjecture, talking head analysis, and endless media coverage were shown to be void of substance. People were left with the question of why all the attention?


There is so much going on in the world and in America and we get the Kobe/Jackson/Peterson/Stewart run around. Better than in depth analysis on the Iraq war. Or Political platforms, Or Air Quality, Or reporting on big Oil, on and on.
 
(Moderator edit - Link advocates criminal behavior.)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Mod Hat - Closure

Mod Hat - Closure

Since the most informative link anyone could come up with is the SPFC, which requires his guilt in order to support their appeal for an increase in the murder rate, this topic is officially closed.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top