Circumstancial evidence is evidence like they found the bastage in San Diego with dyed hair and a car that he bought under a fake name with fake identification. Several credit cards: some his, some of family members. The car was full of survival gear--tents, sleeping bag, etc. He had $10,000 cash on him. He also had Mexican money on him. That must have taken a deliberate intiative to an exchange. An innocent man would have maintained and fought for his own integrity and wouldn't have made such a stupid move like this.
I'm sure he was freaking out because he knew it was coming to the end once they found the victm's bodies. Nothing like running to make a man look guilty as hell. He did it all himself.
He was a liar, a cheat, and an arsehole. If he never wanted children, he should have gone to get himself fixed. It could have saved a lot of problems. But that's all hindsite.
I think the verdict was just. The death penalty is too good for someone who kills like that. I'm OK with letting someone like him live in hell for years and living a ....ty life for what they've done.
quote: The death penalty is too good for someone who kills like that. I'm OK with letting someone like him live in hell for years and living a ....ty life for what they've done.
I agree 100%, WN!, but todays prisons aren't like that. Now, if they were like the Bastille was, then I would agree. Today prisons are just tax-sucking hotels supporting a$$holes with my hard earned money. Crime would be a lot lower if people knew they might be sleeping in a cold stone cell with a dirt floor they share with rats and insects.
I think it's amazing that they were calling her baby a fetus. Wasn't she almost to term? Like 8 months along? That's a baby to me. Babies are born much younger & survive. And maybe he didn't kill the baby (circumstantial), but I bet when he killed the mom, the baby just forgot to move out! hey! It was suicide! That is just so ridiculous to say that he killed her but not the son.
I've been on a murder trial. When they are soooo guilty, you don't even have to guess. The state has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he was guilty. The defense can come up with any weird defense they feel like in order to try to generate doubt. The police thought he did it or they wouldn't have been following him.
We also lost 2 people off our jury. It happens. That's why there are alternates. Sometimes the emotional strain is more than one can bear. One of ours had a nervous breakdown.
I just can't believe some people actually stick up for the guy!
[Mood of the topic.] posted November 15, 2004 11:15
Laci, Conner bill is law
[THE ASSOCIATED PRESS]
President Bush kisses Sharon Rocha, mother of Laci Peterson, after Bush signed the Unborn Victims of Violence Act.
[THE ASSOCIATED PRESS]
Sharon Rocha watches as President Bush signs the Unborn Victims of Violence Act during a ceremony in the East Room of the White House on Thursday. Standing behind Rocha is her husband, Ron Grantski. The legislation makes it a federal crime to harm a fetus during an assault on a pregnant woman.
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
By MICHAEL DOYLE
BEE WASHINGTON BUREAU
Last Updated: April 2, 2004, 07:17:00 AM PST
WASHINGTON -- President Bush signed Laci and Conner's law on Thursday, giving Laci Peterson's loved ones some statutory satisfaction.
Her mother, Sharon Rocha, and stepfather, Ron Grantski, looked on as Bush took the last step on legislation that recognizes fetuses as separate victims during violent federal crimes against pregnant women.
A top priority of the abortion opposition lobby, the new law goes further than comparable laws in states such as California.
"Anytime an expectant mother is a victim of violence, two lives are in the balance, each deserving protection and each deserving justice," Bush said in an East Room ceremony at the White House. "If the crime is murder, and the unborn child's life ends, justice demands a full accounting under the law."
The House and Senate passed by relatively easy margins what is officially called the Unborn Victims of Violence Act. Congressional approval, though, came only after the bill stalled on Capitol Hill for several years.
Advocates credit the Peterson case with helping ignite momentum.
"It's great," Rocha said of the bill.
"It's been a long time coming," Grantski added.
He reported his stepdaughter missing on Christmas Eve 2002, soon after her husband, Scott, said he returned to an empty house in Modesto after a day of fishing on San Francisco Bay.
The bodies of mother and unborn son washed ashore in the bay in mid-April. Police arrested Peterson a few days later.
Under California law, he is being prosecuted on two counts of murder, one for his wife and one for their unborn son.
Now, with Laci and Conner's law, the federal government has a similar fetal homicide statute for deaths associated with other federal crimes, such as those committed on federal property.
Since 1999, groups such as the National Right to Life Committee have sought such fetal protection on a national level. Last year, in what proved a pivotal move, Rocha and Grantski asked lawmakers to name the legislation after Laci Peterson and her son.
Rocha and Grantski made multiple lobbying trips to Washington, including last week when the Senate provided final approval on a 61-38 vote.
They have become old hands at television appearances, too. Wednesday, they appeared on CNN's "Larry King Live."
"There are times that I feel you have to be very cautious about what we say or do because you never know what's going to end up in the media," Rocha acknowledged to King.
Other families witness signing
Joining Rocha and Grantski in the lobbying campaign, and at the White House on Thursday, were others who have lost pregnant family members. Seven stood with arms linked while Bush signed the legislation during the 10-minute ceremony, but Laci Peterson's family drew Bush's special attention.
"They have laid to rest their daughter, Laci, a beautiful young woman who was joyfully awaiting the arrival of a new son. They have also laid to rest that child, a boy named Conner, who was waiting to be born when his life, too, was taken," Bush said.
"All who knew Laci Peterson have mourned two deaths. And the law cannot look away and pretend there was just one."
There were tears as Bush spoke, but also big smiles, and he capped the event by giving Rocha a kiss on the cheek. The chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Utah Republican Orrin Hatch, followed by giving Rocha a hug.
Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry, the presumptive Democratic presidential candidate, opposed the legislation. He and other skeptics, including California's Democratic senators, Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer, contend it is really ammunition for abortion opponents.
"(It) now takes the position in law that life begins at conception," Feinstein said during Senate debate. "This, then, involves this bill directly into a woman's right to choose -- an issue that need not be raised and should not be raised in this debate."
Law 'potentially divisive'
Feinstein followed up Thursday with a letter to Bush, urging the president not to use the new law as "a potentially divisive statement on the abortion issue."
Republican congressional leaders and GOP rank-and-file members attended the signing ceremony, with Rep. Dennis Cardoza of Merced one of the few Democrats present.
Grantski said he sees the act as strictly a law-and-order measure. "This is not about abortion," he said by phone late Wednesday.
Grantski said he supports a woman's right to make decisions about abortion, pointing specifically to rape cases. According to him, stiffer penalties under the new law could help deter future attacks on pregnant women.
Cardoza echoed that comment. "To me, anything that puts bad guys in jail for a longer time, I'm for it," he said.
New law covers every stage
Thirteen states, including California, have laws that protect fetuses during part of pregnancy. California's law, written in 1970, protected "a fetus," without defining it further.
In a 1994 case involving an assault on a woman who was 24 weeks pregnant -- the woman survived, but her fetus did not -- the state Supreme Court clarified the law to cover a fetus "beyond the embryonic stage of seven or eight weeks."
Laws in 16 other states, like the new federal law, cover fetuses at every stage of development.
The federal law designates for protection "a child, who is in utero at the time the conduct takes place," and further defines this as a "member of the species Homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb."
It will be no defense for an accused person to say they did not know the woman was pregnant.
Bee Washington Bureau reporter Michael Doyle can be reached at 202-383-0006 or mdoyle@mcclatchydc.com.
Bee staff writer John Cot?ontributed to this report.
this is one I posted from the politics and taks forum in the discussion about Roe VS Wade and this case.
Rabid because I point out that your assumptions are wrong about adoption? Come on....
In my experience, and that of our friends, adoption accross cultural barriers has worked well. There are honorable people who do it for honorable reasons.....
You accused these people of buying babies, again, I am pointing out that in the case of our family, and our friends, that is not true.............
I would further add that Cool Waters WAS adopted into the a family of the same cultural back ground as herself, and her life was hell....so that idea of same culture, didn`t help her a bit...........
Recommended Posts
Nottawayfer
Circumstancial evidence is evidence like they found the bastage in San Diego with dyed hair and a car that he bought under a fake name with fake identification. Several credit cards: some his, some of family members. The car was full of survival gear--tents, sleeping bag, etc. He had $10,000 cash on him. He also had Mexican money on him. That must have taken a deliberate intiative to an exchange. An innocent man would have maintained and fought for his own integrity and wouldn't have made such a stupid move like this.
I'm sure he was freaking out because he knew it was coming to the end once they found the victm's bodies. Nothing like running to make a man look guilty as hell. He did it all himself.
He was a liar, a cheat, and an arsehole. If he never wanted children, he should have gone to get himself fixed. It could have saved a lot of problems. But that's all hindsite.
I think the verdict was just. The death penalty is too good for someone who kills like that. I'm OK with letting someone like him live in hell for years and living a ....ty life for what they've done.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Belle
I agree 100%, WN!, but todays prisons aren't like that. Now, if they were like the Bastille was, then I would agree. Today prisons are just tax-sucking hotels supporting a$$holes with my hard earned money. Crime would be a lot lower if people knew they might be sleeping in a cold stone cell with a dirt floor they share with rats and insects.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
LuckyGirl
I think it's amazing that they were calling her baby a fetus. Wasn't she almost to term? Like 8 months along? That's a baby to me. Babies are born much younger & survive. And maybe he didn't kill the baby (circumstantial), but I bet when he killed the mom, the baby just forgot to move out! hey! It was suicide! That is just so ridiculous to say that he killed her but not the son.
I've been on a murder trial. When they are soooo guilty, you don't even have to guess. The state has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he was guilty. The defense can come up with any weird defense they feel like in order to try to generate doubt. The police thought he did it or they wouldn't have been following him.
We also lost 2 people off our jury. It happens. That's why there are alternates. Sometimes the emotional strain is more than one can bear. One of ours had a nervous breakdown.
I just can't believe some people actually stick up for the guy!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
mj412
[Mood of the topic.] posted November 15, 2004 11:15
Laci, Conner bill is law
[THE ASSOCIATED PRESS]
President Bush kisses Sharon Rocha, mother of Laci Peterson, after Bush signed the Unborn Victims of Violence Act.
[THE ASSOCIATED PRESS]
Sharon Rocha watches as President Bush signs the Unborn Victims of Violence Act during a ceremony in the East Room of the White House on Thursday. Standing behind Rocha is her husband, Ron Grantski. The legislation makes it a federal crime to harm a fetus during an assault on a pregnant woman.
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
By MICHAEL DOYLE
BEE WASHINGTON BUREAU
Last Updated: April 2, 2004, 07:17:00 AM PST
WASHINGTON -- President Bush signed Laci and Conner's law on Thursday, giving Laci Peterson's loved ones some statutory satisfaction.
Her mother, Sharon Rocha, and stepfather, Ron Grantski, looked on as Bush took the last step on legislation that recognizes fetuses as separate victims during violent federal crimes against pregnant women.
A top priority of the abortion opposition lobby, the new law goes further than comparable laws in states such as California.
"Anytime an expectant mother is a victim of violence, two lives are in the balance, each deserving protection and each deserving justice," Bush said in an East Room ceremony at the White House. "If the crime is murder, and the unborn child's life ends, justice demands a full accounting under the law."
The House and Senate passed by relatively easy margins what is officially called the Unborn Victims of Violence Act. Congressional approval, though, came only after the bill stalled on Capitol Hill for several years.
Advocates credit the Peterson case with helping ignite momentum.
"It's great," Rocha said of the bill.
"It's been a long time coming," Grantski added.
He reported his stepdaughter missing on Christmas Eve 2002, soon after her husband, Scott, said he returned to an empty house in Modesto after a day of fishing on San Francisco Bay.
The bodies of mother and unborn son washed ashore in the bay in mid-April. Police arrested Peterson a few days later.
Under California law, he is being prosecuted on two counts of murder, one for his wife and one for their unborn son.
Now, with Laci and Conner's law, the federal government has a similar fetal homicide statute for deaths associated with other federal crimes, such as those committed on federal property.
Since 1999, groups such as the National Right to Life Committee have sought such fetal protection on a national level. Last year, in what proved a pivotal move, Rocha and Grantski asked lawmakers to name the legislation after Laci Peterson and her son.
Rocha and Grantski made multiple lobbying trips to Washington, including last week when the Senate provided final approval on a 61-38 vote.
They have become old hands at television appearances, too. Wednesday, they appeared on CNN's "Larry King Live."
"There are times that I feel you have to be very cautious about what we say or do because you never know what's going to end up in the media," Rocha acknowledged to King.
Other families witness signing
Joining Rocha and Grantski in the lobbying campaign, and at the White House on Thursday, were others who have lost pregnant family members. Seven stood with arms linked while Bush signed the legislation during the 10-minute ceremony, but Laci Peterson's family drew Bush's special attention.
"They have laid to rest their daughter, Laci, a beautiful young woman who was joyfully awaiting the arrival of a new son. They have also laid to rest that child, a boy named Conner, who was waiting to be born when his life, too, was taken," Bush said.
"All who knew Laci Peterson have mourned two deaths. And the law cannot look away and pretend there was just one."
There were tears as Bush spoke, but also big smiles, and he capped the event by giving Rocha a kiss on the cheek. The chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Utah Republican Orrin Hatch, followed by giving Rocha a hug.
Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry, the presumptive Democratic presidential candidate, opposed the legislation. He and other skeptics, including California's Democratic senators, Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer, contend it is really ammunition for abortion opponents.
"(It) now takes the position in law that life begins at conception," Feinstein said during Senate debate. "This, then, involves this bill directly into a woman's right to choose -- an issue that need not be raised and should not be raised in this debate."
Law 'potentially divisive'
Feinstein followed up Thursday with a letter to Bush, urging the president not to use the new law as "a potentially divisive statement on the abortion issue."
Republican congressional leaders and GOP rank-and-file members attended the signing ceremony, with Rep. Dennis Cardoza of Merced one of the few Democrats present.
Grantski said he sees the act as strictly a law-and-order measure. "This is not about abortion," he said by phone late Wednesday.
Grantski said he supports a woman's right to make decisions about abortion, pointing specifically to rape cases. According to him, stiffer penalties under the new law could help deter future attacks on pregnant women.
Cardoza echoed that comment. "To me, anything that puts bad guys in jail for a longer time, I'm for it," he said.
New law covers every stage
Thirteen states, including California, have laws that protect fetuses during part of pregnancy. California's law, written in 1970, protected "a fetus," without defining it further.
In a 1994 case involving an assault on a woman who was 24 weeks pregnant -- the woman survived, but her fetus did not -- the state Supreme Court clarified the law to cover a fetus "beyond the embryonic stage of seven or eight weeks."
Laws in 16 other states, like the new federal law, cover fetuses at every stage of development.
The federal law designates for protection "a child, who is in utero at the time the conduct takes place," and further defines this as a "member of the species Homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb."
It will be no defense for an accused person to say they did not know the woman was pregnant.
Bee Washington Bureau reporter Michael Doyle can be reached at 202-383-0006 or mdoyle@mcclatchydc.com.
Bee staff writer John Cot?ontributed to this report.
this is one I posted from the politics and taks forum in the discussion about Roe VS Wade and this case.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rascal
Rabid because I point out that your assumptions are wrong about adoption? Come on....
In my experience, and that of our friends, adoption accross cultural barriers has worked well. There are honorable people who do it for honorable reasons.....
You accused these people of buying babies, again, I am pointing out that in the case of our family, and our friends, that is not true.............
I would further add that Cool Waters WAS adopted into the a family of the same cultural back ground as herself, and her life was hell....so that idea of same culture, didn`t help her a bit...........
Disagreement does not constitute rabid.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
wyteduv58
UH Rascal my dear aren't you in the wrong thread?
Love ya, Dovey
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.