Scott Peterson gets the death penalty and Robert Blake goes

[Cleita]

free? Somehow, there is an unexplainable inconsistency here, or I don't get it, anyway.

[Dookus]

1. One was convicted

one wasn't. I don't see an inconsistency.

Should all accused be sentenced to death because Peterson was?

[Cleita]

3. Both allegedly killed their wives.

So shouldn't they have the same punishment? Or is it because Scott killed his baby too? I still don't get it.

[HEyHEY]

5. No, one was found guilty in a court of law of killing his wife

The other one was acquitted, no alleged stuff here.

[Dookus]

6. I don't understand

Are you saying the actual conviction or acquittal is irrelevant?

Because they were both accused, they should both get the same punishment, even though one of them was acquitted?

[Warpy]

7. Uh, did I miss something?

Wasn't Blake ACQUITTED? Are you gonna start killing people because they got ACCUSED, even if a jury didn't think the state made its case?

Gee whiz, maybe if they'd come up with a little forensic evidence like powder residue on his hands or sleeves they could've made it stick. Or if they'd come up with an actual hitman instead of a granstander who changed his story just one time too many.

Oh, I forgot. This is GOP bizarro world, where an accusation oughta be enough to end a life.

[HEyHEY]

8. "we've found a witch! May we burn her?"

"How do you now she is a witch?"

"She looks like one!"

[Warpy]

16. hey, I resemble that remark!

[coloradodem2005]

2. Blake was a little rascal. That's why.

:P

[medeak]

4. perhaps it was sympathy for the victims?

photogenic pregnant woman vs. woman who ran scams.

[Cleita]

10. I think you are right.

I really think Scott should have gotten life and Blake isn't blameless, even though he was acquitted. If I were a juror I probably would have given him some time, although not life. He could have coped a plea of temporary insanity or something like that, which would have given him a lesser sentence, but an acquittal?

[quinnox]

9. My landlady said Peterson was convicted on flimsy evidence

She said she watched the trial and it was all circumstansial. I said that still doesn't mean he didn't do it, she agreed but said based on the evidence alone she doesn't see how the jury could convict.

[Cleita]

11. This is kinda what I'm talking about.

Both cases were based on circumstancial evidence.

[Dookus]

13. probably 99% of all evidence

presented in all criminal cases is circumstantial. It's not a barrier to conviction.

The jury in the Peterson case thought he was guilty. The jury in the Blake case did not. I really don't see why there should be any sort of equivalence between the two cases.

[JI7]

14. the evidence against Blake wasn't so trustworthy

i think the defense did a good job of putting doubt into the minds of the truthfulness of what those testifying against Blake were saying. many of them were thuggish types . and throw in the background of the victim and people think a person like that could have created many enemies who could have killed her other than Blake.

i think one juror said she found it hard to trust or take seriously those who were used as witnesses against Blake.

[jdj]

12. I guess it's true that he was tried in the media.

However, his recorded statement to Amber Frey that "I didn't kill Laci BUT I KNOW WHO DID" pretty much sealed it for me. It was either pre-meditated, or a conspiracy. He was an accessory at the very least, and the SOB could have copped to this and saved his own ass...but he didn't, for some reason, and the obvious reason for that would seem to be that he is guilty of the murder.

[Cleita]

15. They just interviewed a friend of Scotts who said he

really couldn't accept that he was a cold-blooded killer. He thinks there's more that hasn't been made public.

[jdj]

17. Good lord, that's what all the friends say.

"He's such a nice guy, he wouldn't do that, blah, blah, blah."

Men.....there is something wrong there.

Men always think their friends are "nice guys", always. He can be a wife-beater and a child-rapist, and as long as the child or wife in question isn't HIS wife or child, then ol' buddy Scott Peterson or whomever is always the 'nicest guy you'd ever want to know.'

edit: if you were facing down the death penalty and had something to make public, you'd make it public. the fact that Scott never turned up another card speaks volumes.

[HEyHEY]

18. Please, let's not turn this into a "Man" thing

I myself and many people I know have broken off contact with a friend because they found out something like that about them.

[jdj]

19. they had folks all over the news talking about what a "nice guy"

Brian Nichols was.

Demeanor means nothing, and sometimes the people who are closest are the most blind.

My point is with Scott looking at death if he had an ace in the hole, the trial would've been the ideal time to pull it out,no?

I think this kind of talk has zero to do with the perp, any way, it's the Kubler-Ross grief cycle, the first stage of which is denial, and it's narcissism at it's core because the denial comes from folks not wanting to face what being this close to someone like this and not seeing these tendencies says about THEM. It really isn't about Scott at all, it's about this guy not wanting to process his own bewilderment about how he could have been so blind and what that says about him.

[JVS]

20. People who beat and rape wives and children play it close to the vest

It's not as though they want people to know what they're up to