Scott Peterson SHOULD NOT get the Death Penalty...

Scott Peterson SHOULD NOT get the Death Penalty because of one very clear reason, the actual evidence that convicted Mr. Peterson was completely circumstantial.

There should be a line drawn between sending a convicted murderer to death when the violent act was actually witnessed by a third party or a recording device, versus sentencing someone to death who has been convicted by circumstantial evidence only.

Although I think Mr. Peterson probably did the crime, it is not out of the realm of possibility that someone else murdered his wife Laci and also had Mr. Peterson followed so they could dump the body where Mr. Peterson had been the day the murder happened.

It is possible, isn't it?

I believe Mr. Peterson was convicted even though there probably was a shred of doubt in some of the jurors minds, and to me the "compromise sentence" would be to not subject Mr. Peterson to the Death Penalty.

It's possible that one of the jurors will actually ADMIT to having a tiny bit of doubt about Scott Peterson's guilt even though they STILL voted for a conviction. IF one of the these jurors publically admits to having even a tiny bit of doubt about Scott Peterson's guilt after having voted for a conviction, an appeal process could be launched that lasts for decades or ultimately leads to a retrial.

If just one of these jurors opens their mouth the wrong way when they appear on all of those television shows and admits they had a doubt but voted for conviction, then it's back to square one, I guarantee it.

Why not avoid all of this and give Mr. Peterson a life sentence? It will be much more difficult for the defense team to challenge a life sentence because if the case is appealed, Mr. Peterson really does stand to lose his life on appeal.

If Mr. Peterson attempts to appeal a life sentence because a juror admitted to having a twinge of doubt about his guilt, Mr. Peterson would probably be looked at as being greedy and the kind of person who would have done the crime he was convicted of.

The District Attorney will blow it big time if they continue to pursue the death penalty in the Scott Peterson murder trial.

Quote:

---

If just one of these jurors opens their mouth the wrong way when they appear on all of those television shows and admits they had a doubt but voted for conviction, then it's back to square one, I guarantee it.

---

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I'm afraid not. The fact that a juror may have second thoughts is not a basis for an appeal in American courts.

It's simply not practical to do it any other way. It's human nature to have second thoughts. To allow such appeals would overwhelm the court system.

I basically agree with you and it appears that Mr. Peterson has had his 15 minutes of fame.

I would put my theory into the category of pleading the fifth ammendment. The fifth ammendment does not work equally for everyone. If one is a "private citizen", the fifth ammendment works the way it is supposed to work, but if one is a celebrity, pleading the fifth is basically viewed as a guilty plea.

Depending on the profile of the individual, the fifth ammendment's usefulness changes.

My theory as it relates to Mr. Peterson is because it was a high profile case a juror who had a smidgen of doubt but still voted for the death penalty could get spotlighted in the media and thusly give those opposing the death penalty a legal point to hang their appeal on.