dune_girl Posted December 14, 2004 Report Share Posted December 14, 2004 That tent city sheriff is my hero. I saw a documentary on him some time back. He has all the male prisoners wear pink dyed underwear. He feeds them balonga on white bread with water for lunch. They work all day. AND I saw where some guy said "This aint right. He's treating us like animals" ...deeeerrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr.... someone that is in jail for mugging and raping an old woman IS AN ANIMAL! They complained how they hated it, but it wasn't going to deter them from coming back. I think they were saying that in the name of child psychology. The ol...I hate it when you do that.... to get the other person to do it more. Morons.That sheriff should be president. RIGHT ON!! I knew i was forgetting something about that....haha tell me it wouldnt suck to have to wear pink underwear boys... we learned about it in our criminal justice class and he definately is my hero..hehe...and as far as going back...i think once they're out--they will want to stay out Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fireman-hott Posted December 15, 2004 Report Share Posted December 15, 2004 please fireman, cry me a river...scott had a team of highly paid lawyers helping him get his fair shot at the system. and now, all of us taxpayers will be paying for his many many appeals. so i dont feel a bit bad for him. i think this is FINALLY an example of the justice system WORKING. fuck scott peterson, and all his supporters. 293205[/snapback] If you re-read what I wrote you'd know I wasn't supporting him and felt he was guilty too. I was talking about the shit surrounding his conviction. The legal system failed in providing physical evidence to convict him. If you can be convicted based soley on circumstantial evidence that leaves all of us up to bullshit problems. Say you drove by a Burger King at 7pm in your black ranger, precisley that time give/take a few minutes that place is robbed and the getaway vehicle is a black ranger. You get pulled over and because your male within 2-3inches of the robbers height and driving the same vehicle as the robber you'r guilty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue Duece Posted December 15, 2004 Report Share Posted December 15, 2004 (edited) Say you drove by a Burger King at 7pm in your black ranger, precisley that time give/take a few minutes that place is robbed and the getaway vehicle is a black ranger. Edited December 15, 2004 by Blue Duece Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redlined Posted December 15, 2004 Report Share Posted December 15, 2004 I Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fireman-hott Posted December 15, 2004 Report Share Posted December 15, 2004 Thanks at least someone else sees my view point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brooke Posted December 15, 2004 Report Share Posted December 15, 2004 you two obviously didnt follow the trial very closely. both of you are talking out of your asses. but maybe thats just me FEELING too much, and not THINKING enough Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redlined Posted December 15, 2004 Report Share Posted December 15, 2004 you two obviously didnt follow the trial very closely. both of you are talking out of your asses. but maybe thats just me FEELING too much, and not THINKING enough 293329[/snapback] How can you not follow the trial? It Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brooke Posted December 15, 2004 Report Share Posted December 15, 2004 yea my point exactly. please, stop watching your liberal touchy feely bullshit "news" all you get from them is crap Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redlined Posted December 15, 2004 Report Share Posted December 15, 2004 (edited) yea my point exactly. please, stop watching your liberal touchy feely bullshit "news"all you get from them is crap 293341[/snapback] I Edited December 15, 2004 by Redlined Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fireman-hott Posted December 15, 2004 Report Share Posted December 15, 2004 Yeah, I'd expect better out of you Brooke. No murder weapon nor a cause of death for all any of us know it was Scotts side girlfriend. Might explain why she so quickly came to record their convos. I'm still stuck on 2 points. Baby was found out of the mother with so called tape around its neck, yet against all odds was found right near the mothers body I would have expected it to float away. Secondly if he did dump the body there about a week give/take a few days decomposition of the body would have made it bloat and fill with gas which would have brought it to the surface. Anybody that deals with dead people can attest you'd need more than concrete anchors to hold the body down....alot more. Maybe his girlfriend killed laci and dumped her somewhere than after she realized "oh shit if they dont find it with some way to connect it to him I'm fucked" she and possibly an accomplice dumped the body in the water conviently in the waters by where he went fishing. Could explain why it took 4 months for them to find the body in an area previously searched...Oh and the other thing I'm hung on is how you can have a jury that everyone says is hung, taking them forever to reach a verdict, in 2 days you replace 2 jurors, and feed them the evidence and 24 hours later you get a conviction? Even the almighty Brooke can't deny that ranks high on the suspicion gauge. Maube they were the only two of the jurors that actually went in with an open mind and the evidence didn't clear out their reasonable doubt...which is all thats needed. Oh and the OJ thing...mo it wasn't the system that failed it was piss ass poor police work. Plain and simple the cops fucked that scene and evidence collecting up hardcore. That my friends is why he walked...Reasonable Doubt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PUSH THE THROTTLE Posted December 15, 2004 Report Share Posted December 15, 2004 What about the weights Peterson was making in his garage using a buckets and concrete? Wasn't the body weighted down by something? Concrete anchors could hold a person down until the concrete decomposed because it was just bag concrete it won't last under water. He was placed at the scene, had the motive and was gearing up for leaving the country. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redlined Posted December 15, 2004 Report Share Posted December 15, 2004 What about the weights Peterson was making in his garage using a buckets and concrete? Wasn't the body weighted down by something? Concrete anchors could hold a person down until the concrete decomposed because it was just bag concrete it won't last under water. He was placed at the scene, had the motive and was gearing up for leaving the country. 293452[/snapback] All circumstantial. Look, there are lots of theories and I have no idea what really happened. Yes, the circumstantial evidence makes it look like Peterson did it, and I Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PUSH THE THROTTLE Posted December 15, 2004 Report Share Posted December 15, 2004 I just think that a man should be proven guilty, beyond a reasonable doubt. 293480[/snapback] Reasonable doubt is something that I Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
03LE Posted December 15, 2004 Report Share Posted December 15, 2004 An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth is what I believe in The word I hate most is victum... you know something bad happened if there is a victum oh ya im sure he will get lucky and be in his own cell away from everyone else. personally i think they should have given him life in prison so he could live out his days thinkin about what he did and potentially becoming someones bitch. either way it just costs us all money. Right on the money, (no pun intended) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fireman-hott Posted December 15, 2004 Report Share Posted December 15, 2004 still PTT. What about the jury being hung than 2 are replaced and magically he is guilty just like that? Maybe those 2 held a reasonable doubt that someone else did it, or they felt he did it but there just wasn't enough evidence besides the media hype for them to believe. A case based soley on circumstantial evidence used to be a impossible to win without something tying someone to the death. The girlfriend still had motive to kill laci probably knew where they lived and had probably been in the house too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.