The Peterson Verdict
I'm probably in a minority on this, but the Peterson verdict makes me uncomfortable. I think it's likely that Scott Peterson killed his wife and baby. I just don't see the proof.

Best I can tell is that the most damning pieces evidence against him were a comment he made to his mistress where he, (before Laci's death), referred to himself as a widower, and the fact that his alibi puts him in the viscinity of where the bodies were found. Never mind the fact that the bodies were found in a location that just happens to be surrounded by a population of roughly 2 million people.

No cause of death. No scene of the crime.

Please forgive me, but how on Earth do you convict anybody of murder when you can't even demonstrate conclusively by what means the victim died? And special circumstances? Malice of forethought? Without even having the foggiest inkling of how, where or even when the crime was carried out?

If this is the standard of proof by which we now conclude a capital case, I might have to rethink my support of the death penalty.
- served up by Nomad @ 7:12 PM