I was on Alan Colmes radio show tonight discussing the Scott Peterson verdict. I was suprised that my sparring partner, victim's rights advocate Wendy Murphy, who makes Nancy Grace seem like a liberal defense lawyer by comparison, is philosophically and morally opposed to the death penalty. She acknowledged that Scott Peterson's life has some value. She said she was opposed to the Laci & Connor Law that made it a federal crime to kill an unborn fetus and believes that right to lifers have politicized the case. We ended up spending a significant portion of the two segments discussing how anti-abortionists can claim to value life but support the death penalty. A caller asked me the question in reverse, how could I oppose capital punishment as murder but not abortion. [My answer: abortion isn't murder, executions are state-sanctioned murders.] How can people can claim to choose life but support killing?

Friday, on Hannity and Colmes, former prosecutor and Fox News Legal Analyst Lis Wiehl said she was opposed to the death penalty. Tonight, Bill O'Reilly said in his opening comments that the jury's decision was "emotion driven." Bill O'Reilly has said many times he's opposed to the death penalty. All of them believe that Scott Peterson killed his pregnant wife. But, the death penalty? That's a stretch.

What's next for Scott Peterson? Does he go right to San Quentin? (No, he hasn't been sentenced yet.) The Sacremento Bee has a page answering these kind of questions.