Scott Peterson Sentenced to Death

[scaeagles]

Speculation only, of course.....

I wonder if the judge is an abortion advocate. I do not know what was within his purview regarding the charges, but it could be that he is unwilling personally to recognize the unborn child as a victim, and therefore would not allow Scott's parents to testify.

I wonder if this ruling will result in charges brought up by a prospective father against a woman who aborts his child. While a different issue completely, either an unborn child can be murdered or an unborn child cannot. A conviction for murdering an unborn child would certainly lay ground for such a case. Food for thought.

Certainly cause for appeal, as if they weren't automatic anyway.

[SacTown Chronic]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

Speculation only, of course.....

I wonder if the judge is an abortion advocate. I do not know what was within his purview regarding the charges, but it could be that he is unwilling personally to recognize the unborn child as a victim, and therefore would not allow Scott's parents to testify.

If that were the issue, I'm sure the judge would have found a way to overthrow the death penalty sentence. The death penalty in California requires murder with special circumstances. In this case the special circumstance was the planning and murder of two people. The murder of Laci alone would not have been enough cause for sentencing Scott to death.

[Ghoulish Delight]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

While a different issue completely, either an unborn child can be murdered or an unborn child cannot.

Funny, would you use the same argument against the death penalty (i.e., either a person can be murdered or not). At which, point, of course, you start to think, "But the death penalty isn't murder, blah blah blah". But, of course, that's my point. EVEN if there's agreement that an unborn child is a life, the termination of a life does not equal murder every time. You can't make a sweeping generalization like that. Context matters. State executioners aren't arrested for murder, soldeirs in battle aren't arrested for murder, doctors pulling the plug on brain-dead patients aren't arrested for murder. It just ain't that simple.

I DON'T want to get into an abortion discussion. That's kinda my point. While tangentially related, it's not a simple conclusion of, "he was convicted of murdering the unborn child, therefor abortion is murder." Totally different context.

[jdramj]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

Speculation only, of course.....

I wonder if the judge is an abortion advocate. I do not know what was within his purview regarding the charges, but it could be that he is unwilling personally to recognize the unborn child as a victim, and therefore would not allow Scott's parents to testify.

I wonder if this ruling will result in charges brought up by a prospective father against a woman who aborts his child. While a different issue completely, either an unborn child can be murdered or an unborn child cannot. A conviction for murdering an unborn child would certainly lay ground for such a case. Food for thought.

Certainly cause for appeal, as if they weren't automatic anyway.

Not that I disagree with you and I'm sure this is just a typo...."allowing Scott's parents to "testify"."?

I'm sure there is no malice on the Judge's part in only letting one side speak, especially since it was allowed only after the sentencing was done, if I read it right. Besides, Scott was only charged with 2nd degree murder of the unborn child, as it was different for Laci.