Web Hosting Forums

Page 1 of 3 1 2 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 32

This is a discussion on Scott Peterson Trial - Another 'Black' Trial? in the Hosting Talk & Chit-chat forum
I can't get an answer on this. Nobody wants to talk about it... Does anyone know if Scott Peterson is a mulatto? I know he ...

  1. #1
    Yeah, I know a LOT! Vin DSL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Arizona Uplands
    Posts
    10,661

    Scott Peterson Trial - Another 'Black' Trial?

    I can't get an answer on this. Nobody wants to talk about it...

    Does anyone know if Scott Peterson is a mulatto? I know he might be a octoroon or quadroon. You can tell by the kinky hair, but you know what I mean!

    My theory is there are a lot of high profile 'black' trials going on right now, but everyone is being so politically correct these guys will get away with murder and rape 'cause it's thought that the women involved are getting what they deserve, messing around with mixed-race guys.

    Anybody know for sure?
    DISCLAIMER Any resemblance between the views expressed above and those of the owners and operators of this system is purely coincidental. Any resemblance between these views and my own are non-deterministic. The existence of Vin DSL is questionable. The existence of views in the absence of anyone to hold them is problematic. The existence of the reader is left as an exercise in the second-order coefficient.

    No Guts, No Story! VinDSL 2010

  2. #2
    Pointy Stick Expert
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    141
    Lonely under your bridge today, eh?

  3. #3
    A geezer, with 1 foot in. Oldfrog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    204
    I am sure that we would all hope that every trial in the United States was fair and impartial and that justice was always correctly served. It is a paradox of our times that the closer the public scrutiny, the less fair and impartial a particular trial becomes, as each member of the cast, including jurors, vies for their moment in the spotlight. I fail to see how the defendant's ethnicity bears on the matter at hand. Maybe we should all just sit back and let the wheels of justice turn.
    Gravity, more than a good idea, it's the law!

  4. #4
    Yeah, I know a LOT! Vin DSL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Arizona Uplands
    Posts
    10,661
    Kinda proves my point, huh?

    Everyone knows it's impossible for a black man to get a fair trial in America. Either they're lynched or they get away with murder, literally.

    The only question I have is whether or not Scott Peterson is black. I say, yes! Ever see a picture of his mom?

    Let's see how long it takes the defense to play the 'race card', so called...

    Vin's Predictions:
    • Michael Jackson (molestation) - Not Guilty
    • Kobe Bryant (rape) - Not Guilty
    • Scott Peterson (murder) - Not Guilty, if colored. Guilty, if white.
    Last edited by Vin DSL; 06-04-2004 at 12:27 AM.
    DISCLAIMER Any resemblance between the views expressed above and those of the owners and operators of this system is purely coincidental. Any resemblance between these views and my own are non-deterministic. The existence of Vin DSL is questionable. The existence of views in the absence of anyone to hold them is problematic. The existence of the reader is left as an exercise in the second-order coefficient.

    No Guts, No Story! VinDSL 2010

  5. #5
    Loyal Client
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Posts
    164
    LOL, careful -- your true colors are showing! I don't know what you mean, but Ross Perot might.

  6. #6
    || $name ne 'R.Stiltskin'
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Tejas
    Posts
    2,414
    Originally posted by Df_Gamer
    ...I don't know what you mean, but Ross Perot might.
    What do you mean? That Perot Sr. knows whether or not Scott Peterson is a mulatto? That justice is/is not blind? That black men cannot get a fair trial in America? That Pop Perot is a racist?

  7. #7
    web nerd cinderblock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Houston, Texas
    Posts
    28
    Sadly i wil have to agree with Vin...
    that bastard will get away with murder if they play that "card", Michael Jackson will settle his plastic surgery butt out of jail and Kobe...well they are already trying to defamate the girl he raped.

    Personally:

    . Michael Jackson should be sent to Huntsville woot for Texas
    . Scott P. should be let loose around San Quentin and see what happens to him
    . Kobe Bryant should def. be incarcerated, taken out of the NBA and made an example that no matter wether youre white, black yellow or brown, what he did was wrong. Shoot, he is married!! he should have known better IMO

  8. #8
    || $name ne 'R.Stiltskin'
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Tejas
    Posts
    2,414
    Originally posted by Vin DSL
    Vin's Predictions:
    • Michael Jackson (molestation) - Not Guilty
    • Kobe Bryant (rape) - Not Guilty
    • Scott Peterson (murder) - Not Guilty, if colored. Guilty, if white.
    Since we're polling, I'll go with these extremely unscientific positions:
    • Michael Jackson>Gut - Guilty | Verdict - Guilty
    • Kobe Bryant>Gut - Not Guilty | Verdict - Not Guilty
    • Scott Peterson>Gut - Guilty | Verdict - Not Guilty
    I don't think Jackson can plea out of jail - well maybe he'll go to a minimum security camp if convicted. Kobe, while acting poorly, met someone who appears to have a very questionable behavioral history. If that is allowed in court, Bryant will go free. Peterson is the case I'm most puzzled about - circumstantial foundation of prosecution is pretty hard to win, and Garagos appears to be an excellent attorney. It just seems like Peterson did the crime based on what I've heard but there is no hard evidence to pin on him.

  9. #9
    Loyal Client
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Posts
    164
    I won't take a position on the question of guilt because my investigation experience has shown me that courtrooms are not always bastions of truth, and we know the media bends things lol.

    But Jackson appears guilty and his trial has progressed too far for him to escape unless his team can generate a mis-trial or the prosecution screws up as the prosecution did with Simpson.

    I have serious questions about the Bryant complainant just as I did about the one in Tyson's case. (Tyson's case created a very unusual evening in my Houston hotel room one 3 am LOL)

    And Scott Peterson REALLY appears guilty but then so did JonBenet's parents and Simpson but they are, all three, still walking around free.

    Verdict predictions:
    Jackson -- Guilty
    Bryant -- Not Guilty
    Peterson -- Guilty

  10. #10
    Ron
    Guest
    Hey as far as Simpson goes, I don't know if he did it or not. I strongly suspect that he did.

    But when that cop went over Simpson's wall without a warrant, ostensibly to see if Simpson was ok, he put the case in jeopardy.

    When that cop LIED and said that OJ was no more of a suspect than the prosecutor (if I recall), when A) The husband is ALWAYS a suspect immediately, and B) This cop had been to the residence of this very famous person on a domestic call before, as a juror, I would have thrown out anything from that cop. That damaged the case, in my mind, beyond repair.

    All his testimony was worthless. The evidence he found -- tainted and worthless. Anyone he had contact with -- tainted but not worthless. I would have approached deliberations with that in mind, right off the bat.

    I won't go into all the details as my memory is worse than I'd like it to be. But suffice to say, that at the time and with the info that was being filtered out of the courtroom into the media, I thought he was probably guilty, but that the verdict was correct.

    That cop was worried that his entry without a warrant would cause all of the evidence to be tossed on an illegal serach and seizure technicality. So he lied.

    Stupid thing is, if that cop had said: "Yes, of course he was a suspect. The spouse and close family members are always at the top of our list whenever we investigate a murder. But I went over that wall because I was immediately concerned for his safety. I wasn't in a hurry to gather evidence, that could have waited for a warrant if needed," the verdict might have been different.

  11. #11
    || $name ne 'R.Stiltskin'
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Tejas
    Posts
    2,414
    Originally posted by Ron
    ...Stupid thing is, if that cop had said: "Yes, of course he was a suspect. The spouse and close family members are always at the top of our list whenever we investigate a murder. But I went over that wall because I was immediately concerned for his safety. I wasn't in a hurry to gather evidence, that could have waited for a warrant if needed," the verdict might have been different.
    Too bad you weren't there to "coach" the prosecution's witness. Justice might have been served.

  12. #12
    Loyal Client
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Posts
    164
    The curtilage keeps shrinking with plain sight, open fields, exigent circumstances, wingspan searches, and protective sweeps. Soon you won't be safe in the bathroom, oh wait, your bathroom. Public bathrooms do not provide a legal 'expectation of privacy'.

    Damn, thanks for the thread Vin, I think I just discovered my dissertation.

  13. #13
    || $name ne 'R.Stiltskin'
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Tejas
    Posts
    2,414
    Originally posted by Df_Gamer
    Damn, thanks for the thread Vin, I think I just discovered my dissertation.
    dissertation = 'expectation of privacy' in one's bathroom? You might need to narrow it down to basin vs bathtub vs toilet. Or just wash your hands of the whole subject.

  14. #14
    Ron
    Guest
    Originally posted by Df_Gamer
    [...]I think I just discovered my dissertation.
    It will certainly be better received by academia than one expounding on the need to fight terrorism by fighting radical Islamists overseas.

  15. #15
    Old Hillbilly Connie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Hills of Missouri
    Posts
    2,491
    It is amazing how diverse this board has become. I think that is good.

    I don't want to get into the innocence or guilt of any of the cases that
    have been referenced. I believe in the death penalty. I also believe
    that the prosecution has to prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt. If
    I were setting on a jury I would only vote to convict it the prosecution proved
    their case. In my mind to prove the case requires hard evidence.

    Is Scott Peterson guilty? He may be. If I were setting on the jury it would
    take more than I have seen on the news at this point to convince me to vote
    guilty.

    I may change my mind as the trial progresses.

    Is Scott a scum bag? Yes! But I was a scum bag in the last few years of my first marriage.
    I don't think the guy is guilty because he is a scum bag.

    Did Scott lie about some things to the Police and to the press? Yes! does that make
    him a killer? I don't think so.

    Vin I don't thank race will have anything to do with this. I saw a picture of his
    father today and he looked white to me. In all the pictures of Scott that I have
    seen I have never noticed any of the characteristics that you refer to.

    Bottom line for me. The prosecution has to prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt.



Page 1 of 3 1 2 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •