elaine said:
Wait a minute, here! It's okay to hang Scott Peterson before he's tried, but not this character? What am I missing?
Ease up babe, I just said it sounded like you were already convinced, even before the revelation of his confession.
You are missing nothing :shrug: I never advocated hanging Peterson before he was convicted :shrug: I just find it disturbing these days of the "trial by media" and wild public speculation have to in some way taint the fair trial guarantee.
Think about it, Petersons trial had to be moved several counties way because the media hype had tainted the jury pool. Problem is it was the national media and that tainted the pool in a much wider area than just Modesto. Now, given that Peterson is a convicted murderer, what if he got off on appeal because the hype and sensationalism was so widespread they determined the jury pool in the other county was tainted and he did not receive a fair trial? That would be a travesty.
Also, knowing how the media could screw up simple a birthday announcement I think they do a horrible disservice to the judicial process as do the people who “leak” or provide details of the case/investigation.
I don’t know if this guy is innocent or guilty. I do know that he has the right to a fair trial and that can only be done if an unbiased jury of his peers are allowed to see compelling evidence and they are free from implicit or explicit pressure to convict or acquit. That cannot happen if everyone is whipped into frenzy before the trial date is set.
I like our legal system, it provides for a fair trial, puts the burden of proof on the prosecution and requires a capable and adequate defense. If I am ever faced with a trial, I want it to be the one I am guaranteed in the constitution and not one that was argued in the media and pre-judged by the jury members based on what they saw on Dan Rather’s newscast.
) and that the office is closed until further notice.
