Guilty of 1st Degree for Killing Lacy
Guilty of 2nd Degree for killing Conner

Now the real ugliness begins. Deliberations on his sentencing starts on the 22nd of November. It will be interesting as he appeals how the dismissal of 2 jurors, including the Foreman, effect the outcome of that process.

Personally I don't know how I feel as a California with the thought of my tax dollars going to house him for the rest of his life if he gets the mandatory life sentence.

To tie the knot....cinck the rope up around his neck .....and
kick the chair out from under him.

The analyst on CNN mentioned that CA executes about one person
per year and that there are about 600 people on death row.

His point was that whatever happens (even if the guy gets the
death penalty) he will probably live out his natural life in
prison.

If we are trying to reduce prison costs, I would rather pay to keep him away from society forever, than pay for some (emphasis on some) of the 3rd strike prisoners.

you taxpayers are going to pay for-in the millions, many millions

So, if he didn't want the dull, boring life of marriage and kids (yahoo article), then why did he get married?

And why is it, that even after conviction and incarceration, they rarely ever tell what exactly did happen? I mean, what have they got to lose at that point?

You're right..even if he gets the death penalty, we probably still won't see him fry!

Hi SS,

This was a high profile case. That being said, I believe CA. will facilitate his demise. The people will want it that way!

Scott Peterson, table for one!!!!!


http://muezae.bei.t-online.de/gif/death_row_gurney.gif

...and would do anything to get them back....I would be proud to shoot him. God knows that the boy deserves to die.

I find myself wondering.  When I was young, I was in favor of the death penalty.  Kill someone?  Fry.  As I grew older, though, and I saw the failings of our judicial system (yes, it's the best there is; but it still has problems), I began to back off.  My concern was that, in circumstantial cases, it's possible an innocent person might be executed.

Then DNA analysis came into its own.  Now, you can barely enter a room without leaving some evidence behind.  Kill someone?  DNA says it was you?  Bye.

The evidence here is damning.  It's voluminous.  It's overwhelming....  But it's still circumstantial.  For example, I'd love to hear an explanation about how the dog was running loose on its leash at a time when Peterson was known to have not been home.  How did it get out?  The only thing I can think of was Lacy opened the door and it got out.  It's a loose end.  It bothers me.

Look, my common sense and my gut tell me this guy needs to feed worms.  I just don't like loose ends when a needle's involved.

Now OJ?  Hand me the syringe.

I share your sentiments.  In many respects life in prison may be the harsher treatment.  Look he is convicted of killing his wife because he “didn’t want the dull, boring life of marriage and kids”.  (What happen to the concept of divorce??).  Now he can look forward to a boring prison life with very little chance of enjoying the pleasures of women again.  With respect to the taxpayers it will be cheaper to incarcerate him for life than to executed him.

and it costs the taxpayer millions to deal with all the appeals and the other infrastructure of state sanctioned murder, why not get rid of the death penalty altogether?

I'm arguing this on economic grounds because, clearly, the notion that it's barbaric and has no place in a sophisticated, developed country eludes many of your state governments.

Guilty of having an affair while his wife was pregnant.

He should have called Johnny

than execute him? I am not sure where you get your numbers, but last I checked with a close friend who works with the Prison facilities in the state of California, it costs the California's taxpayers somewhere near $50,000 a year to house an inmate. Just 1. And how many are imprisoned for life? I guess when you weigh that against 10 years worth of appeals it might be a fair argument....but when the average inmate spending his life in prison spans somewhere near 50 years and you times that by the number of prisoners who will never see the outside again....I feel as though my tax dollars would go to better use elsewhere. That syringe is not that costly.

Yes I weigh it against the cost of appeals (which will most likely be much longer than 10 years) to the taxpayer that will be considerable especially in this high profile case with the happenings with the jury and the circumstantial nature of the case. The man is 32 years old and I doubt he has 50 years left and even if that is the case you are talking about an extra 40 years assuming a conservative 10 year appeal process.  Moreover you have to consider the difference in spreading the cost over 10 years as opposed to 50 years. Again let me state that I think incarceration for life is probably the severer form of punishment that at worst will be at equal cost and probably less costly to the taxpayer than an execution. Finally, while I have a chance I would like to take the unfavorable position that I found the taunting of Scott Peterson’s ill mother while she was leaving the courthouse after the verdict to be repugnant, to say the least.

may be candid but not very well informed.  For instance, they did not factor in the value of any services performed by inmates.  Many large prison systems farm out labor for various companies and get paid for it.  That has to be deducted from the cost.  Plus, as another post points out, the cost of appeals ain't cheap, no matter how much the US Supreme Court tries to limit them.  As for the syringe, no matter how much we hate Scott Peterson, remember that other inmates who supposedly have committed equally gruesome crimes have been freed after later evidence proved them innocent.  If this guy were your son or brother, maybe you'd want him to have that chance even if he was 80 years old when he gets out.  Finally, as many other developed nations have discovered, state sponsored killing has a cost that often can't be calculated in terms of dollars, e.g. what a nation thinks about itself, how it treats the lowest among them, and how it asserts moral suasion on those "developing" countries that still engage in practices some of us would consider barbaric.  Bottom line, it ain't just a dollars and cents equation.

There will come a time when Americans look back on those of us who lived while Americans were executed the same way that we look back on those who lived while there was slavery in America.

I hope I live long enough to see that time.






-- Modified on 11/15/2004 7:06:09 AM

Most of the $50,000 is a fixed cost for maintaining and running the prison infrastructure that will be unaffected whether Peterson is incarcerated for life or not.