or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Archives › Miscellaneous › Activism Archives › Should Scott Peterson be charged with 1 or 2 murders?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Should Scott Peterson be charged with 1 or 2 murders?

post #1 of 47
Thread Starter 
I have been watching the news and have heard a few debates on this. The main argument given is that he should not be charged with the murder of a "viable fetus" since it was not born. I have been reading throught the thread regarding abortion and have been thinking a lot on my views about this in general. My first thought when seeing the Scott Peterson debate on the news was that sure he should be charged with both murders. Then my hubby said, then you have to be pro-life too (in terms of the fetus being a person with rights and so on). Anyway, we had a big discussion about whether or not he should be charged with both.

I still have no conclusion, but was just curious what you all thought. (Excuse the incoherance above as I am just spewing thoughts as they run through my head. It's one of those days that I am walking around like: )
post #2 of 47
I feel strongly that he should be charged with both murders simply because that baby could have been viable without his mama.

Sad, sad case, I hope Scott Peterson fries!!!!
post #3 of 47
Definately two murders.
post #4 of 47
Quote:
Originally posted by Mamax3
I feel strongly that he should be charged with both murders simply because that baby could have been viable without his mama.
I agree with Mamax3.
post #5 of 47
Thread Starter 
Okay, so I feel that way too. But if the thought that it should be 2 murders because baby Conor would have been viable without him mama, then would any abortion past, say 20-22 weeks (when in theory a baby could survive on it's own), be murder? (playing total devil's advocate here, off my hubby's point of view). I am having a hard time in my own head making all my views agree with each other.
post #6 of 47
Ca law is that a non-abortion related killing of a fetus is murder.
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cacode...187%2D199.html
post #7 of 47
Thread Starter 
Yeah, I read that too, and legally, I get it. But some states do not have that law, so I am just trying to sort it out in my tired brain, as to what the right way to do it is. See, this is why I should not discuss with my husband (who is as far right as they come).
post #8 of 47
Well there is precidence for charging someone with murder of an unborn child, especially when the child is full term and I think he should be charged with both.
post #9 of 47
My personal view goes like this- a fetus is most loved by its mother, usually. She should be allowed to decide if she wants to treat the fetus as a person, with all the rights of a human being under the law. In this case, Laci can't tell us how she felt, but I feel comfortable betting that she would want her son's murder charged as such.
And while Scott's behavior is suspicious as h-e-double hockeysticks, I'd like to see him tried before he is convicted.
post #10 of 47
Whoever did this should definitely be tried with both murders. But then again I think life begins at conception. So it is an easy choice for me to make.

Even if I didn't I still think the person who did this should be tried for both because the mother didn't choose for the baby to die. The baby was killed against her will and I do think that makes a difference.
post #11 of 47
I've very pro-choice, but I think that this man should be charged with 2 murders. That baby was full-term and was killed for no reason and to me that makes all the difference.

Marcy
post #12 of 47
I guess I want the penalty for killing Laci Peterson to be so severe, i.e. the death penalty-that being charged for the baby's murder wouldn't really matter. I understand the symbolic gesture though.
post #13 of 47
No, you don't necessarily "have to" be pro-life. I am pro-choice and think that even the demise of a non-viable fetus without the consent of the woman is murder.

In some states, one can be charged with 3rd degree murder if he assaults a woman and causes her to have a miscarriage, even with a nonviable fetus. I support this as well.
post #14 of 47
Oops, double post and it wouldn't let me delete.

post #15 of 47
I believe that a woman confers her status on her unborn child. By wanting the baby, her interests, desires and intentions in regard to the pregnancy are what the law should protect. And vice-versa.

Laci's intention was to have the baby; this was her choice. I think the law should honor that with a double-homicide charge.
post #16 of 47
Being pro-choice doesn't have anything to do with believing in abortion or not. It means believing our government doesn't has the right to tell me what to do with my body.

So semantics, yes, but important.

Personally I think he should be tried for two.
post #17 of 47
I'd be another pro-choicer who thinks that a) it's a double murder and b) whomever did this should get the death penalty. I firmly believe in "guilty until proven innocent", so I will hold off on saying that Scott did this. I think he acted too oddly about all of this, IMO.
post #18 of 47
I would like to see it tried as two murders. I don't know where the line is drawn in terms of unborn babies, but... Because it was HIS kid, and the pregnancy so far along, he could have been born anytime really, it feels like it should be two counts. IF SP did it. if he killed Laci, and he intended to do kill her, he knew he was killing his baby too. He knew there was a life in there that would be snuffed out by his actions, so, yes, I think, two counts of murder. It's not like he's a stranger who accidentally hit her with a car and subsequently both she and the baby died (and the stranger didn't know she was pregnant/didn't mean to kill anyone). If SP did it, He absolutely knew he would kill the baby, take a life.


And of course I am just speculating that he did it... I really hope he has a fair trial. There has been so much attention to this case... they should have some pretty good proof if he is inded the one.
post #19 of 47
T I'm shocked by how many of you are wanting the death penalty for this. I'm only writing this here because the other thread in TAO seems to want to leave "Activism" out of the thread there.
In my opinion, it's a much worse fate to spend the rest of your long life in prison, getting raped by the inmates and struggling for survival. (I wish we could somehow make our prisons safe too. I think it's totally wrong that we just accept that when a person goes to jail there's a very good chance you'll be raped. And no, we're not going to stop it from happening or even discourage it. WTF?)
As it's been said many times, killing a person to show that killing people is wrong doesn't make any sense at all, IMO!
Respectfully,
Marcy
post #20 of 47
I agree Marcy, as much as I hate what has happened and feel he is guilty I don't want to see the death penalty imposed.

For one thing, it costs more money to impose the death penalty. Of course, I don't support the death penalty for any case.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Activism Archives
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Archives › Miscellaneous › Activism Archives › Should Scott Peterson be charged with 1 or 2 murders?