Peterson gets death sentence

Scott Peterson gets the death sentence.

It will be interesting to see how many murders his impending execution will prevent.

Another sad day for the civilized world.

 

Quote: Scott Peterson gets the death sentence.
Response: But his execution most likely will never happen in CA.

Quote: It will be interesting to see how many murders his impending execution will prevent
Response: probably around zero.

Quote: Another sad day for the civilized world
Response: Yes it is - Peterson was convicted by the media long before his trial. It seems like murder trials are becoming the latest "reality" shows. Next up the trial of a TV star followed by that of a record producer

 

Re: Re: Peterson gets death sentence

I want to make it clear that although I am opposed to the death penalty I believe Peterson committed those horrible crimes.

 

The death penalty has never been about justice, it is about vengence, plain and simple. (not that vengence is a such a bad thing).

Peterson, like a great many of the convicts on death row, will probably go insane in his cell years before he is put to death (if at all).

Have fun at Quentin Scott. Be sure not the bend over the pick up the soap

 

At least he won't be able to murder again. I mean, the guy killed his wife and unborn child. What punishment fits this crime? Death.

I think the only thing sad about it is that the punishment isn't immediate and will drag on for years before it is ever realized (if ever). I think the only thing a civilized world could do is put people like this to death.

 

To which I would add, a slow and painful death would be just. But we have a constitution about cruel and unusual punishment that fortunately for creeps like Peterson prevent such justice from being executed.

 

One of the things I have never understood is that many supporters of capital punishment I have known over the years, will call someone like Peterson, Manson, Gacy, et. al. cowards if they kill themselves rather than face arrest, court, conviction, etc.

They have and will say these people took the easy way out. Yet, whether an evil person who has committed horrible crimes kills himself or the state kills him amounts to the same thing--death. I

This almost tells me it's about vengeance rather than justice because the public (state) didn't terminate the life.

 

There's an exception to every rule, no? Here is one death penalty supporter who would never call a prime suspect or convicted murderer a "coward" if they commited suicide either before their arrest, trial, conviction, or sentence delivery. I would simply shrug and think "Well, despicable as you may have been you sure saved the state a ton of money." Because I agree with you, the end result of either is death so it matters little how that end is achieved.

That said, I would like to clarify that I am a supporter of the death penalty but a reluctant one. I understand the arguments against it, but also feel the state should not have an obligation for perpetual care of these individuals for the rest of their natural lives. That care includes housing, feeding, medical care, entertainment, education, etc., and it's all provided at the expense of the state and provided free to an inmate who has no chance of ever getting out. Abolishing the death penalty leads to situations like the one in California, where someone like Charles Manson is being cared for for the rest of his natural life.

Yes, I have heard the argument that delivery of the death penalty actually costs more than perpetual care when one adds in the automatic appeal costs and all other costs associated with delivering the death penalty. But it's not purely about cost. It's about providing perpetual care (including entertainment!) to a convicted perpetrator while his victim(s) lay rotting in the ground and his victim's family is, through their tax dollars, helping to provide perpetual care to the very person who brutally deprived them of their family member. I don't think that's justice.

On the other hand, I was also shocked at the cheering that erupted in the crowds outside the courthouse when the Peterson penalty was read. Although I do support the availability of the death penalty to the state, I also believe that a pronouncement of death should be a somber undertaking that should be regarded with appropriate seriousness at the pronouncement and at the delivery of such a punishment. The smiles, cheers, and laughter at the pronouncement of this penalty were chilling, regardless of the seriousness of the crime for which Peterson was convicted.

Kit

 

It seems to me that Peterson was given death, not for the murders, but because he showed no emotion during the trial. Sure, he was on trial for murder, but I think he could have saved his own life had he shown a little more remorse.

He was disparaged in the press, as much for lying and cheating as he was for murder. After hearing some of the statements from the jurors, I truly believe they based their decision on their own personal opinions of Peterson's character.

Had there been no Amber Fry, and had Peterson broken down a few more times in court, I don't think he would have received death. For all I know, he may have been found not guilty.

 

Why isn't vengeance just?

 

Re: Re: Peterson gets death sentence

I agree that the press behaved like jackals in this.

But I think that the court system, and the jurors here in my own San Mateo County, performed very well. I listened to those three jurors taking questions yesterday, behaving with great dignity in the midst of a total media circus, and they impressed me tremendously.

 

Re: Re: Re: Peterson gets death sentence

I agree that the Jury acted very well despite the media circus (where do these Jury Analyst leeches come from?). The clowns who cheered the guilty verdict and the death sentence are truly twisted. No one won - everyone lost.

 

Perhaps it it philosophically but I cannot see it in the context of Christian theology.

 

Doesn't any punishment include vengeance?

 

I guess this is a question for greater minds than I.

I see punishment as justice and don't see justice being synonomous with vengeance.

 

I do not believe in the use of circumstantial evidence in giving someone irreversible sentence such as death penalty. The jury did a bad job in opting for the death penalty. He should have been sentenced to life with or without the possibility of parole. There could be one percent chance he may not have committed the murder.

Oko

 

Jimmy,
There are several instances where God's vegeance is seen as a vehicle of justice. (The Midianites for one). I think it is well within God's nature to seek vengeance and it is seen as just.

For example, when concerning judgement.
O LORD, the God to whom vengeance belongs, O God of vengeance, let your glorious justice be seen! - Ps 94:1

Or concerning the enemies of God
when I sharpen my flashing sword and begin to carry out justice, I will bring vengeance on my enemies and repay those who hate me. - Du 32:41

In God's judgement of the wicked, vengeance is seen as the ultimate form of justice.

 

Hi, Michael,

Divine vengeance is a different story, is it not?

Rom 12:19

 

Hi, Michael,

Divine vengeance is a different story, is it not?

Rom 12:19

Remember that the Greek word ekdikesis is most commonly used when speaking of divine vengeance and is free from any element of self-gratification or vindictiveness.

 

Absolutely,

But when speaking of vengeance as just you said "but I cannot see it in the context of Christian theology" -- I was commenting on that.

It gets complicated becuase numerous times man has been the instrument through which God's vengeance was brought. In that sense, there exists a very prominent theological element to justice through vengeance.

Vegeance is just if it is brought by God or by man acting on God's behalf or via divine instruction. A statement obviuosly fraught with complication.