Scott Peterson - Guilty or Not Guilty?

[DiscipleDOC]

I think he's guilty as sin. What do you guys think?

[2fast4u]

well, first of all who _is_ scott peterson?

i seriously want to know since i havent even encountered that name before.

[bknblk]

DD,

While this is a great topic, I find your poll too limited in scope. Personally, I beleive he may well have perpetrated this crime, but the burden of proof at this point has certainly not been met enough to convince me beyond a reasonable doubt. There is absolutely zero physical evidence thus far. They have successfully proven that he is a man of low moral character and a liar. That is all they have proven so far and unless they have better days than what transpired with a prime prosecution witness yesterday, they will not get a conviction. Cicumstantial cases must be very strong and this one hasn't proven to be this far. I take solace in the knowledge that The Lord knows the truth and if he is gullty he will ultimately pay a price far greater that being gently euthanized.

[DiscipleDOC]

True...but I was more or less looking for the opinion of people that have been following the case. I think he's guilty because of the lies he told about his whereabouts, and the fact that adultery is a good motive. Not only that, he told his girlfriend, that he was at one place, and then told the cops he was at another.

Forget the fact that he's been proven to be a scumbag, but I think he has a more devious reason to lie as much as he has.

Oh 2Fast4U....do a google search.

[Riptide]

I agree with bknblk. They have shown him to be a jerk, but they haven't done enough to prove he killed Laci. It looks awfully suspicious to me but I'm not ready to throw away the key yet.

[Sazar]

DD,

While this is a great topic, I find your poll too limited in scope. Personally, I beleive he may well have perpetrated this crime, but the burden of proof at this point has certainly not been met enough to convince me beyond a reasonable doubt. There is absolutely zero physical evidence thus far. They have successfully proven that he is a man of low moral character and a liar. That is all they have proven so far and unless they have better days than what transpired with a prime prosecution witness yesterday, they will not get a conviction. Cicumstantial cases must be very strong and this one hasn't proven to be this far.

thats my take on this too...

[2fast4u]

Oh 2Fast4U....do a google search.

might as well later. just couldnt be arsed so i thought id ask ;)

[UDawg]

might as well later. just couldnt be arsed so i thought id ask ;)


I would not waste your time with this 2fast. This is a way over blown case.
My mom's aunt is really good friends with Laci's mom in Modesto and she constantly talks about this case when she comes up. I just frankly don't care. No offence DD. :kill:

[DiscipleDOC]

I would not waste your time with this 2fast. This is a way over blown case.
My mom's aunt is really good friends with Laci's mom in Modesto and she constantly talks about this case when she comes up. I just frankly don't care. No offence DD. :kill:

Non taken, bro.

[evilchris]

He probably commited the "perfect crime". He'll most likely get away with it. It's so obvious he's guilty, just not enough proof.

[EDWARD TIVRUSKY]

(daz) Hmm... don't know yet, insufficient evidence. To the mods: please add third option like "not sure/don't care" to the options. DD, i'd say there are many people who don't know/don't care, sad but true.

[Saint Lucifer]

There's no reason to put a "Don't Know/Care" option. If you don't know or care, then you simply don't answer the poll.

[bknblk]

First off; This post is not political in nature. Let's stop with religous and criminal posts being placed here as opposed to the OPEN forum. Second: UDawg and Steeda, would you be willing to share the compelling evidence that has been presented which would enable you could be convinced beyond THE SHADOW OF ANY DOUBT that Scott Peterson committed these crimes? I would love to hear what you have heard that would enable you, no, compel you to vote this man guilty and vote for his death. I am so often on the same page as you guys, but you are completely disregrding due process here. For guys that quote The Constitution and Bill of Rights so frequently, how could you be so willing to disregard some of it's more important and basic rules?

[UDawg]

Would I be willing. I don't care enough to be willing:D I just think he is guilty. There is not proof logic or reason behind it other than how the media has portrayed this. So my opinion really isn't fully informed enough to give a compelling argument.

[PsychoSy]

DD,

While this is a great topic, I find your poll too limited in scope. Personally, I beleive he may well have perpetrated this crime, but the burden of proof at this point has certainly not been met enough to convince me beyond a reasonable doubt. There is absolutely zero physical evidence thus far. They have successfully proven that he is a man of low moral character and a liar. That is all they have proven so far and unless they have better days than what transpired with a prime prosecution witness yesterday, they will not get a conviction. Cicumstantial cases must be very strong and this one hasn't proven to be this far. I take solace in the knowledge that The Lord knows the truth and if he is gullty he will ultimately pay a price far greater that being gently euthanized.

^^^^ what he said!

At the rate this is going, the only thing in this case that'll hang is the jury.

[Son Goku]

I must say, some links or something would be nice. Without really knowing specifics (and from some posters indications, there isn't enough known to come to a conclusion); how could one caste a vote that honestly reflects what they think?