home

Live Chat: Scott Peterson Sentence

By Jeralyn, Section Crime in the News
Posted on Wed Mar 16, 2005 at 11:08:54 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

I'll be doing an online chat about the Scott Peterson death sentence today for the Washington Post at 3:00 p.m. ET, one hour from now. You can submit your questions now and follow along here.

< Peterson Sentenced to Death | Prison Deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Live Chat: Scott Peterson Sentence | 9 comments (9 topical)
    Re: Live Chat: Scott Peterson Sentence (none / 0) (#2)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 16, 2005 at 12:23:08 PM EST
    Jeralyn - "The National Coalition to Abolish the Death penalty, nacdp.org, reports that various state governments have estimated the cost of a single death penalty case, from the point of arrest to execution, to range between $1 million and $3 million per case. Other studies have estimated the cost to be as high as $7 million per case. Cases resulting in life imprisonment average around $500,000 each, including incarceration cost." This report repudiates your claim.

    Re: Live Chat: Scott Peterson Sentence (none / 0) (#3)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 16, 2005 at 12:24:16 PM EST
    death penalty is cruel and unusual, against most scientific and ethical studies,used for monetary reasons through history,self contradictory as anything except revenge and infinite domain boasting by the state,a segway to physiologic tampering with human biology by the state,slipery-slope to mass executions; reason enough,

    Re: Live Chat: Scott Peterson Sentence (none / 0) (#4)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 16, 2005 at 01:16:57 PM EST
    Death penalty is only used in subdevelopped countries and/or dictaturships USA apparts, give me the name of democratic countries around the world using death penalty. Can't find much...

    Re: Live Chat: Scott Peterson Sentence (none / 0) (#5)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 16, 2005 at 01:45:26 PM EST
    No Name, the report you cite is 8 years old and prepared by an agenda-driven group. It has no credibility here. The NCADP figures are here.

    Re: Live Chat: Scott Peterson Sentence (none / 0) (#6)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 16, 2005 at 03:53:17 PM EST
    The brain fingerprinting issue is a dangerous zone. Up to date very few psychiastric experts are willing to use it, at least for post-conviction appeals. The test itself is hardly reliable because it cannot discern the memory of act committed as opposed to the recollection of facts registered by a defendant. While this test is considered interesting to prepare for trial (while a defendant may not have not extensive knowledge of the crime's details), it is a very hazardous game during the post conviction appeal time when a defendant has often reviewed extensive documents about the crime - witnesses' testimonies, police reports, autopsy reports, etc. But to come back to the Peterson issue, the trial was a masquerade of justice and after masses of money being wasted, we are no way closer to the truth about his guilt or his innocence. I wouldn't bet anything on one or the other. The media had convicted Peterson almost before his arrest, they portrayed him as the good looking and wealthy murderer - the monster who killed his pregnant wife - that made cheap headlines and brainwashed the public about the reality of the case and the evidence available. It's worrying to see the media interfering that much with a case, particularly when a life is at stake. The man is no doubt a womanizer and probably a lier, but since when does that make someone a murderer?

    Re: Live Chat: Scott Peterson Sentence (none / 0) (#7)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 16, 2005 at 05:26:14 PM EST
    Does the NCADP not have an agenda as well? The report I linked to seemd to use credible sources (i.e. Time magazine). Also, just because the report is from '96, how much has changed besides overall cost adjustments due to inflation to negate its relevance? Lastly, looks their 6 yr estimate for the death penalty side is low, but even if you increase that to 10 or 20 years, it's still less than the LWOP figure (not to mention their points about conservate estimates favoring the DP side). I do think the "beyond all doubt" law is a must. In a perfect world, this would always have been the case. I also do not at all think cost justifies the death penalty - only absolute guilt does. My point was that the cost part of the anti-death penalty argument may not hold water.

    Re: Live Chat: Scott Peterson Sentence (none / 0) (#8)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 16, 2005 at 05:54:46 PM EST
    What has changed since '96 beside general inflation? The AEDPA was signed by Clinton and drastically changed the post conviction process for capital cases... Financially, the cost from trial to execution is somewhere between 2,5 millions dollars and 4 millions dollars depending on the state. The cost of LWOP - even if someone spent 60 years behind bars - is 10 times less. Does that give you an idea of where you tax money is going?

    Re: Live Chat: Scott Peterson Sentence (none / 0) (#9)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 16, 2005 at 06:05:47 PM EST
    Pinkie - so if it cost $4M to put someone to death and a 60 year LWOP inmate cost 10x less, you are saying it only costs $6,666/yr including court costs? That doesn't seem feasible.

    Re: Live Chat: Scott Peterson Sentence (none / 0) (#1)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 16, 2005 at 08:29:25 PM EST
    a man was executed earlier today -- in oklahoma -- proclaiming his complete innocence, even as they were injecting him -- to his very last breath. what of innocence? could scott peterson even remotely possibly be innocent? [i think not.] but -- the oklahoma man's strongest evidence of innocence -- a so called "brain fingerprint," by a harvard scientist, reportedly showing he had no recognition of the crime scene [or the photos of it], was NOT admitted into evidence. if scott peterson were to submit to such a fingerprint, should the appellate courts grant a new trial, assuming he passed the test? or is this last-ditch, junk science? opinions? any-one? any one? p e a c e, -- tae, out.

    Live Chat: Scott Peterson Sentence | 9 comments (9 topical)