Scott Peterson sentenced to DEATH !

Hmm, What about OJ?

i hope the guy burns in hell for what he did.

To bad he has to sit on death row for years, be nice just to be rid of him.

can we send him to texas?

Jen

as they say in Houston, "they let him make it"

It'll cost several hundred thousand to keep him fed and guarded on Death Row..

All it would take is ONE bullet that cost less than a dollar to do the job...

Exactly my thoughts. Has anyone been put to death in CA since the death penalty was reinstated?

Take him out and fry the FUCKER....why waste time?

He will appeal it for the next 20 years and it will just cost the taxpayers several million dollars, that is our justice system for ya. I agree, just shoot him, if they need someone to do it, I am available anytime.

1/29/02 - Stephen Wayne Anderson for murdering an 81-year-old in 1980

[quote=Rhodes71/914,Dec 13 2004, 02:55 PM]

Jen [/QUOTE]
Has anyone been put to death in CA since the death penalty was reinstated? [/quote]
Well get this. I recently worked on a Program for Discovery Ch. about San Quentin and California is so Politically Correct that before an exicution can take place, the state sends a Shrink to, not one, but all the prisions in the state so that any employee OR convict that may have a problem with the death penalty can talk about it to someone.
WTF, the state has to make sure everyone within the system is "OKAY" with it. No wonder this state is broke!

Put him on an island...

Hand him an M59 Fragmentation Grenade with the pin pulled... Hand cuff it to his wrist...

See how long he can keep it squeezed without losing his grip!

If you really wanna be fair you could of course replace the M59 with a Phosphorous based type of incendiary device and watch his skin melt..

Damn it sounds like fun!

[quote=Mike D.,Dec 13 2004, 04:15 PM] [QUOTE=Rhodes71/914,Dec 13 2004, 02:55 PM]

Jen [/QUOTE]
Has anyone been put to death in CA since the death penalty was reinstated? [/QUOTE]
Well get this. I recently worked on a Program for Discovery Ch. about San Quentin and California is so Politically Correct that before an exicution can take place, the state sends a Shrink to, not one, but all the prisions in the state so that any employee OR convict that may have a problem with the death penalty can talk about it to someone.
WTF, the state has to make sure everyone within the system is "OKAY" with it. No wonder this state is broke! [/quote]
That's stoopid....should be on the employment application...."we fry people....hang them, inject them, and whatever"....gotta problem? Don't apply....

I think it would be much more fun if, we sentence him to death. Tell him he is going to die any day now. Let that go on for a year or so. Come in ever so often and escort him to the firing line and get him ready to die. Then send him back to his cell. Don't tell him anything, just keep doing it over and over for a little while. Let him get all strung out and then tell him, "you get to live". After that has sunk in, give him a couple of more days and take him out back and shoot his sorry ass with a 10 cent bullet.

Still looking for the real killers

I really don't watch the new too much... I know I should.. but I just get so damn upset with everything going on over in Iraq. It stresses me out, so I just don't watch.

From what I know of this case..... I guess Peterson killed his pregnant wife, tried to hide the body, and then run off to Mexico, right?

Forgive my ignorance if I'm wrong... but if thats the case.... Good.... he needs to get "offed" in the very near future.

Of course... OJ should have been offed a long time ago. It sucks.. but at least the system worked this time.

I'm just tired of going in the house at 3 Am and finding 3 channels that are all talking about this puke!

two words: ORGAN DONOR (except for the brain)

Until the diliberations, I followed along, then sort of dropped my interest. All along, the prosecution was said to have a very weak case against him. Mostly circumstantial evidence. What was it that convinced the jury to find him guilty?

Andy

Well, look on the bright side. At least with him being a small, neat little guy he'll be very popular with the other prisoners in his cell block for the next 20 years.

A few years of some prison then

He won't last a year.

Child killers are the lowest of the low in prison. He'll get shivved soon enough.

He won't be playin' much golf now. But his cell mate sure will be

Actually he'll be in his cell 23 hours a day. Not much interaction with his fellow inmates when your on the ROW.

Why bother? Just don't believe he will ever be executed. Automatic appeals will go for at least 20 years, and prosecution never really proved the case. He's just such a slime bag he was convicted. Far less on him than they had on OJ. Sooner or later sentence will be commuted, but I believe death row inmates now get 6 hours per day in the yard and no cellmate. That will probabaly take care of things.

Death penalty doesn't really play in CA. Manson and several serial killers are still alive and well.

He's a Baaaad Man !.... Natural selection ..... I say just dump him in SF Bay ..... with some of those cement slippers.... Crabs will fix him! .... AAArrrrrGGGGG ! ... Oh,.... Richard Allen Davis ...he's still on death row .... Remember Polly Klas ? Waste of freak'n flesh ... These girley-men.... Solution = Calif. National Guard Firing Squad, make-it all volunteer duty (no prob.) save major time and $$$$$$$$$$$$ ..... just -do-it !

Allow me to share some information taken from the pages of the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and also some from my career with the California Department of Corrections. San Quentin is currently home to 630 inmates living on "Condemned Row"; CCWF at Chowchilla (Central California Women's Facility) is the home for the 11 female inmates currently under death sentence. The paper claims, "the state has executed just 10 inmates since it resumed capital punishment in 1978, a period in which 38 condemned inmates have died of other means." Of these, "three were killed by other inmates, a dozen committed suicide and the rest died of natural causes." The paper goes on to say, "of the 38 states with the death penalty, California has the greatest number of prisoners on Death Row and moves the slowest toward executions. None of ...(the) Death Row inmates has (yet) finished the mandatory court challenges." Once Peterson is sentenced to death, "he will sit on Death Row for more than five years before being appointed an attorney for his first and mandatory appeal to the California Supreme Court." He would then "join more than 200 others who do not yet have lawyers." ("There are too many inmates with too few lawyers willing to volunteer for the relatively low-paying job. Unlike in many states, California requires the lawyers to have rigorous capital litigation training.") Once his state appeals are exhausted, his case "would move to the federal courts, usually with a new appelate attorney." The case would then go to the district court and then to the infamous, 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals based in San Francisco. Eventually, it might end up in the U.S. Supreme Court.
He will be housed in San Mateo County Jail while the Probation Department prepares a "Probation and Sentencing Report", though I can't imagine what they could possibly include in their report that hasn't been brought out in the trial. He will return to court for sentencing in February and will then be transported to San Quentin by San Mateo County deputies [assuming the Judge doesn't reduce the sentence to Life With Out (Parole) LWO]. Once he arrives in Quentin, he will then become the "property" of the Department of Corrections and be assigned a prison number. Assume that Peterson will be on "suicide watch" for most of his first few months at Quentin; he will most likely be totally isolated from the other condemned inmates due to his notoriety. The normal ratio of inmates to correctional officers is about 200 to 1 but I don't know if that holds true on Condemned Row. Nevertheless, I doubt Peterson's life would be worth much among his condemned neighbors, after all, they can only execute you once! And trust me...in his worst nightmares, he has never seen the kind of neighbors he will have at Q!!!

Ron Balderrama

Give him what he rightfully deserves, a very slow and very painful DEATH

Peterson is being sent to CMF in Vacaville till the 25th February when he gets his sentenced served...

I have been watching the case from day one...what made the jurors pick death someone asked....3 jurors that spoke

yesterday all said it was his lies, and if Peterson did testify they may have had a different verdict...In my point of view and

many others.

" Justice has been served "

The POS won't take the stand because he really has no excuse for his actions.

He just sat there.

P

I hope he rots in prison so long that his bung hole is so big there won't be any question he's empty before he meets the Devil.

Go get him boys.

Dave

Without bothering to address why there is not supposed to be a role of revenge in the justice department, let alone the fact that the criminal justice system is not even intended to punish or warehouse convicts but to rehabilitate them, or for that matter, that execution does not deter others from comitting heinous crimes, let's just look at this one particular matter.

Scott P might have killed his wife. He very likely did, for all the little facts I know (I sure as hell did not follow the case because I did not know the family and the media circus was unattractive when we are embroiled in two wars); but then lots of peoples' behavior looks bad and there are now literally hundreds of people convicted to die who were later found to be factually innocent of their crimes. (Many of them even confessed; educated people do amazing things under duress.) So if you think that the trial proved it, you are kidding yourselves. He is, as we say, "guilty" of killing his wife but that is just a finding from the jury. It does not mean he did so.

When it is the state versus you, the playing field is anything but level and the state typically does a very, very poor job; it is only their resources that permit them to win. OJ had resources to match and you saw what happened.

I say let him play golf with OJ...

This country has become ancient Rome...

Jerry Springer rejects are everywhere....

If he was OJ he would be free....

I think I am moving to the other side of the moon.

i won't be drawn into a political argument! (repeat as necessary)

CA has an alarming felon recidivism rate:

CA stats

LarryP I do not think you are correcting in stating execution does not deter others. I think it does reduce crime. If only we actually carried it out, rather than let them sit for years in jail, it would likely have a greater effect in detering crime.

Of course If there is any doubt in guilt, life in prison is better. But hell, we can't even execute killers caught redhanded in a timely fashion these days.

I recall vividly a radio interview many years ago. A store was robbed, and the two crooks were ready to leave, and one said to the other "lets kill the two witnesses", the other said "no way, I am no going to the chair (electric chair) over this" and they ended up fleeing without killing the robbed store owners.

Assuming that is all true, it appears that the potential death penalty prevented a double murder.

Petersons case, well We didn't hear all the evidence, but from what i did hear, there was no direct evidence, but tons of circumstantail evidence. In a case like that, with any doubt, life would be a better punishment, just in case a mistake is made. But if you got them redhanded, I fail to see any reason not to execute a killer, ecspecially a double or child murder case.

If someone breaks into my house, and captures me, I would prefer the threat of death over that robber if he kills me, than a threat of prison. Figure my odds of living are a bit better under that way, that is one reason the folks out here voted to re-instate the death penalty, and dump the liberal supreme court (california) Judge Birde that over turned every death penalty she came across.


Also, fire the prison guards, and their cushy pension plans, and get some real prisons, tents in the Mojave desert, sorrounded by rings of barbed wire with land mines in between. Have one water pipe go into the tent prison, any problems, shut off the water. Few gaurds needed, low cost, and they arent getting anything worse than our soilders. We spend too god damn much housing these crooks.

In prison they have cable TV, internet access, heat, AC, porno mags, conjugal visits (i.E. Nookie), weight rooms, libraries, just about any DAMN thing you could want. And they don't HAVE to work if they don't want to. Plus they don't have to pay taxes during their stay. Other than the threat of anal rape, it sounds like a country club..... The "people (and I use that term loosely)" that are incarcerated have it better than they do on the outside. Why should they want to leave? Prison should be someplace that you DO NOT want to go to.


Prison should be PUNISHMENT. Build a prison with 1 person cells. If they don't work, they sit in their cell all day. Work should be a chain gang. Why should we pay road contractors to repair the roads, and still pay to feed and house prisoners. WE can get some of the money back by putting them to work fixing roads for the state.

My basic proposal is that upon conviction, a felon should not have any rights except the right to appeal the conviction. For that they should be able to consult with their attorney, who works the appeal for them. Otherwise they are the property of the state, with NO RIGHTS. For that, all we should have to do for them is to feed them, clothe them, and provide them with a bed to sleep in. If they don't want to work, they sit in their cell at all times. Maybe that would keep people from convicting crimes. They get out and tell their friends that prison is a hard assed place word will get around that they dont' want to go there.

(gets down off soap box)

Gut feelings are nice, but the statistics do not bear it out. Even disregarding the studies, and there are many (and the fact that the overwhelming majority of capital crimes are committed in the heat of passion or in exigent circumstances, where cognitive thought is not exactly a prime factor), history alone tells us otherwise.

In Elizabethan England, when one was found guilty of treason against the Crown, you were hung for a while (but without sufficient fall to break your neck) and thereafter cut down while alive, then placed on a rack and broken (e.g., your joints were dislocated), then disembowled while alive, then quartered. Your limbs were sent to the corners of the empire and your head stuck on a spike, all to deter others from similarly plotting against the Crown. There was no appeal, it was agaonizing, and it was immediate. Worse than the pain was the belief that because of your act, and the manner of death, you would then spend eternity in hell. (I believe as well, but may be recalling incorrectly, that due to forfeit, your family would now be destitute.)

If that did not deter treason, and history plainly tells us it did not, what makes you think it would today?

There is a big difference between a politically motivated crime, i.e. Treason to change the government, and a run of the mill street crime. Revolutinaries are usually educated people who feel that the government is wrong, and wants to change it for the better. Street crime is just simply done for the money or personal gratification. Different concept altogether. Make prison really punish the offenders, then we reduce street crime from the deterrent factor. It won't affect someone who commits crimes in the name of revolution. When they are motivated by the common good, even death is not a deterrent.

"Treason" then was street crime; it was simply against the govenrment. It was not for revolution.

We have a major dysfunction in this country as to the concept of crimes; do we want to rehabilitate people and make them useful or do we want retribution? (Remember that the reason we have the-not-guilty-by-reason-of-insanity defense is that we believe (once believed?) that if you were not able to understand that what you did was wrong, or could not control yourself, there was no reason to punish you for your act since the act was not voluntary, or if voluntary, not subjectively wrong.) So we have as a country decided that rehabilitation is the answer ... AHA! ... except for certain crimes (and certain people -- overwhelmingly black and/or Southern and/or indigent), we want punishment, not rehab. So we look for ways to justify it; the Congress tells us it is for the "worst" crimes and the boys in blue tell us it deters crime. Whatever, but the inherent inconsistency makes for insane laws and an insane system.

That is why the concept of "victims' statements" and sentencing and parole hearings is illogical; we KNOW there were victims, that is why there was a trial in the first place. But the impact of the harm is not especially relevant to the disposition of the offender, especially at parole, if the offender is in fact reformed.

Further deponent sayeth not. I am out of here.

This is not political, nor racial, nor religious. Just a good debate.

Our distinguished colleagues from Texas and Connecticut make excellent arguments for each side of this coin. How about a compromise?

The death penalty has not proven to be a deterrent. Do you think someone crazy enough to kill his wife and unborn child worries about the punishment? How about the suicide bombers? How do we threaten them? And what if there's a one in a thousand chance the convict didn't do it? You want to explain that to his family? Economic arguments don't wash either, as the mandatory appeals cost the State far more than keeping the lifer.

The true purpose of incarceration (or worse) should be to protect society. Removal of freedom and being confined with others 'of his type' is, IMHO, punishment enough. Just keep them in a place where they cannot harm me or mine. Lock 'em up and throw away the key.Military style POW camps with Geneva convention guidelines seem ideal.

I believe prison can be for re-hab, for first offense of minor crimes. But after a chain of crimes, or one very bad crime, re-had is not the thing. The purpose of prison or death is to remove that bad person from society, hence no more crime can be committed by that person. There is also deterent value. Prison or death has got to be a deterent, if we had no jails, nor exectutions, the crime rate would go up. Punishment does reduce crime, and punishment can in some cases lead to re-hab.

I am for short, but hard labour jail times for first offenders of minor crimes. A short term, means that person can get out and hopefully get on with life. The term should not be pleasent, no TV, only educational books, and work for 12 hours a day. They could all live in tents in the desert, cheap, and hopefully effective in preventing future crime.

for repeat, or very bad crimes, look them up, again in not a plesant place, but keep them in longer.

It would be cheap, break the prison gaurd union (which the former deposed govenor was on the take with, giving them expensive pensions) and I believe highly effective. The hard work , and tent life would make preison bad enough that the bad guys realy won't want to come back to it. and it will cost very little to house those that repeat offend or are really bad to start with.

Screw billion dollar new prisons, can't afford them, and I believe they are NOT effective at preventing crime like a tent and 12 hour labour day woud be, all for less cost. Win, win.


PS what was all the fasination with peterson (more like peter repository now!!!!). Hell there are many murders every day. The press really ran with this one. I could see all the press coverage with OJ, he had fame before the trial, but perterson, and with wife were average folks, no diofferent than other killers/victums.

Amazing the media hype on this case, amazing.

peterson was niether black, southern, nor indigent, If some groups of folks seem to be convicted more than others groups of folks does not mean that there is an injustice, maybe some groups commit more crimes than others, or live in states that have a higher prosecution rate. I suspect indigents might be more likely to commit a crime, than an average person with a job, and house. Street people often have drug or drink problems that help lead to crime at a higher rate than those with homes. For southerners, maybe the D.A. in those areas do a better job at prosectuion, and the cops might be better (hell out here the cops spend too much time in transgender awarness classes and crap like that, when they should be busting up criminals, doubt there is that much BS for the cops to deal with in the South, at least in rural areas. maybe southerners commit more crimes??? As far as black folks (stepping on a landmine here) could it be that maybe as a general group, there is more crime with them? (I am not stating this as a fact, just offering it as an explaination for the higher incarceration rate for one group, I in no way would single out an individual, and suspect them of crime just because of race) maybe the high level of fatherless children in that group (and that is a fact) leads to more crime as the kids grow up? I have read that a fatherless kid is more likely to engage in crime, drugs, drink than one with a dad, regardless of race. With more black kids fatherless than say oriental kids, does it not makes sense that maybe more black kids as a general statistic get into trouble? It has nothing to do with race, but a lot to do with the enviroment that they are raised in.

At any rate, no system is perfect, but i do not think is right to blame the courts for the supposed un-even incarceration of certain groups, by race, wealth, or location. There maybe some problems, but then again, maybe more homeless folks actually do commit more crimes than folks that own homes.

for suicide bombers, the threat of nuking mecca and that god damn rock them monkeys ride the merry go round chanting death to America would be a good deterent. Islamic terrorists do not fear death (ask peterson if he fears death. He commited his crime thinking he wouldn't be caught no doubt) The lslamic thugs do fear being killed in an unclean state, so toss pig lard on the corpses, that was used as a deterent in the mid east by British colonists, and it worked.

Islamics do not care about there own life (suicide bomb) they do not care about there own children (lets strap a bomb on a 13 year old, and send her out to die)

They care about nothing except there rotten murderous religion, and the holy cities that they pray too, hence threaten to nuke all their holy cities. That is the only way to deter islamic mad men. (or just kill them and be done with it)

For most of the rest of us, we fear loss of life, and loss of freedom, hence those things are used to deter crime here.

Do the Crime Do the Time !

Society Demands-It.... Life is too precious to waste !

These "Animals" should be in a cage... I don't want them anywhere near my daughters... And, I am willing to pay $$$, for their safety !!!

Evil people do exist .... and the good people need to deal with them harshly....
preventing the worst of outcomes...

No-one wants to be the BAD-Guy.... yet, we must punish wrong-doer's !

I have been studying Criminal Justice .majoring in Forensic's and YES they had enough evidence for him to go down....I had been watching the case for 2 yrs.now thats finished I am watching the Robert Blakes Murder Case.....
"Rot in Hell Peterson" even though its on the Tax PAyers money

It made the press down here this morning:

http://www.smh.com.au/news/World/Photos-cl...2787084607.html

just because you write 10.000 words . does not make your
points right its over and i don't need to go over the case again

I feel the anger in these words

no anger just not the right place for this

Sorry Alison...Peterson can't be transported to "Wacky-ville" or any other state facility because technicallly, he has not yet been sentenced to the Department of Corrections; until the "body" arrives at San Quentin with an "Abstract of Judgement" (indicating his sentence), he still belongs to San Mateo County!

Ron

Jeff

I have to admit, that I myself did much to increase those recidivism rates during my 15 years as a Parole Agent for the California Department of Corrections! If a convicted felon who is on parole continues to commit crime...he needs to go back to prison!!! The advantage Parole Agents have (and the reason that most cops "love" working with agents) is that the agent can lock up the parolee based only on a "reasonable suspicion" that a crime has been committed; no trial, no judge and no expense for the county! That is because the parolee is considered to still be in the custody of the state while he is on the streets/parole; arresting the parolee, is simply "elevating his custody status". And since the parolee is still in the custody of the state, he and his property is subject to a search at any time without the need for a warrant; think of this power as a "cell search" on a more extensive basis. When you lock them up for minor things, like drug use, sometimes, you catch them before they "get on a roll" and do something really horrendous. The unfortunate reality is that most of these people are "career criminals" and nothing you do, to them or for them, will alter their lifestyle appreciably!

Ron