Laci Peterson case, fetal homicide, and capital punishment

Wolverine · 21st April 2003, 10:08 PM

Quote:

The head of the National Organization for Women's Morris County chapter is opposing a double-murder charge in the Laci Peterson case, saying it could provide ammunition to the pro-life lobby.

"If this is murder, well, then any time a late-term fetus is aborted, they could call it murder," Morris County NOW President Mavra Stark said on Saturday.

Prosecutors in California announced Friday their intention to charge Scott Peterson, 30, of Modesto, both with killing his wife and their unborn son. Laci Peterson was eight months pregnant when she disappeared Dec. 24.

....

Some pro-lifers hope fetal homicide laws will establish a precedent that fetuses are human beings, thereby fueling efforts to reverse the U.S. Supreme Court's 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion.

....

The second murder charge against Peterson is crucial because he otherwise would not be eligible for the death penalty. The double-murder charge qualifies as a "special circumstance" for which capital punishment may be sought. (Source.)

I had never thought of this case in the context presented here... mainly I was just shocked by the ugly nature of the crime.

What sort of precedent will be set by this case?

I read that there are 27 states which have "fetal homicide" legislation on the books, thereby providing the means for a perp who kills a pregnant woman to be charged with the death of the unborn child in addition to the adult. In California's case, it allows for prosecutors to seek the death penalty.

Could this be expanded in an attempt to set a precedent that abortion is murder?

Will special interest groups keep their noses out of the situation long enough for the suspect to receive a fair trial?

What a potential mess...

iain · 22nd April 2003, 04:44 AM

Where do you draw the line and say that killing a baby or fetus is murder?

I don't think there is any clear place. For some, anything after the moment of conception counts as murder. For the ancient Greeks and many other cultures killing unwanted babies was not considered murder.

Myself I would go with it only being murder after the baby is born. I can't say I have a firm logical basis for this : a baby doesn't change much during birth apart from being inside rather than outside. But you've got to draw the line somewhere and I don't think any other point is better.

Denise · 22nd April 2003, 05:05 AM

I think that maybe the prosecuter could go for violating Lacy's parental rights or choice. Are there a lot of abortions taking place in the eighth month? But if we made a fetus a person in utero all kinds of other issues would pop up.

What if a woman is six months pregnant and is murdered by someone who didn't know she was pregnant. Is that person guilty of a double homocide? I don't think so.

But clearly Scott knew his wife was pregnant so his intent was to harm the child when he killed Lacy. Definitely a connundrum. Hope I spelled that right.

22nd April 2003, 05:13 AM

I am pro abortion, but if a woman is pregnant and wants to give birth, I see no problem with charging someone with murder if they kill the fetus. But I think the prosecution should have to prove that the suspect knew the woman was pregnant and either targeted the fetus or did not care.

22nd April 2003, 05:18 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Denise
I think that maybe the prosecuter could go for violating Lacy's parental rights or choice. Are there a lot of abortions taking place in the eighth month? But if we made a fetus a person in utero all kinds of other issues would pop up.

What if a woman is six months pregnant and is murdered by someone who didn't know she was pregnant. Is that person guilty of a double homocide? I don't think so.

But clearly Scott knew his wife was pregnant so his intent was to harm the child when he killed Lacy. Definitely a connundrum. Hope I spelled that right.

Indeed. I think that in the US, abortions are within the first trimester, except for the so-called partial birth abortions. The issue is, I think, that the call is the mother's. That is to say if he wants the child it is murder. A tough one and once aagaain the "leaders" play politics.

--one "n" I think. Did you really mean "homo" cide?

dmarker · 22nd April 2003, 05:19 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Denise
I think that maybe the prosecuter could go for violating Lacy's parental rights or choice. Are there a lot of abortions taking place in the eighth month? But if we made a fetus a person in utero all kinds of other issues would pop up.

The problem with abortion numbers is that no one separates those fetuses which have died naturally and must be removed or those which are induced. But either way, an eighth month abortion is pretty rare only 2% of abortions are beyond the twentieth week. And that does include those fetuses which have died and must be removed.

22nd April 2003, 06:34 AM

Quote:

What if a woman is six months pregnant and is murdered by someone who didn't know she was pregnant. Is that person guilty of a double homocide? I don't think so

I believe there is a principle in law that a person takes his victims as he finds them. Depending on the law regarding fetal homocide, it would make no difference, therefore, whether the perpertrator knew she was pregnant or not.

Tmy · 22nd April 2003, 06:43 AM

I figure that she had no intention of getting an abortion so the fetus was on its way to being born. Sure she couldve changed her mind but thats unlikely. Sort of like suing for future earnings. I would guess that the killer would have to know she was preggy, after allshe was far along.

Now what if Laci was on her way to the abortion clinic when she was killed? I guess that would still be double murder since the killer did not have the athourity to take the childs life.

22nd April 2003, 06:54 AM

Denise:

Quote:

But clearly Scott knew his wife was pregnant so his intent was to harm the child when he killed Lacy. Definitely a connundrum. Hope I spelled that right.

IF he killed Laci. The 48 Hour Rule applies.

Jedi Knight · 22nd April 2003, 06:55 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by ssibal
I am pro abortion, but if a woman is pregnant and wants to give birth, I see no problem with charging someone with murder if they kill the fetus. But I think the prosecution should have to prove that the suspect knew the woman was pregnant and either targeted the fetus or did not care.

huh?

JK

Tricky · 22nd April 2003, 07:03 AM

[Jedi Knight mode]
If he killed her, it was only because the matriarchal totalitarian society drove him to it. However, the woman is a criminal for putting her fetus in danger, so her death is just the execution she deserved.[/Jedi Knight mode]

Denise · 22nd April 2003, 07:15 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Tricky
[Jedi Knight mode]
If he killed her, it was only because the matriarchal totalitarian society drove him to it. However, the woman is a criminal for putting her fetus in danger, so her death is just the execution she deserved.[/Jedi Knight mode]

Ooh! That was good! More more!

Denise · 22nd April 2003, 07:16 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Smalso
Denise:

IF he killed Laci. The 48 Hour Rule applies.

Yep, thanks for calling me on that. Absolutely unproven at the moment.

Tmy · 22nd April 2003, 07:21 AM

I think we'll need more than 48 hrs.

I always love these editorial newscasters who say silly things like "Well If my pregnant wife was decapitated and washed up along the shore......thats not how I would act." AS if there's an Idiots Guide to the subject.

Ahhh forget it.....he's guilty!

NoZed Avenger · 22nd April 2003, 09:11 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Smalso

I believe there is a principle in law that a person takes his victims as he finds them. Depending on the law regarding fetal homocide, it would make no difference, therefore, whether the perpertrator knew she was pregnant or not.

In criminal law, intent matters a great deal on most issues. Without knowledge, there could be no intent to kill.

NA

22nd April 2003, 09:18 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Jedi Knight

huh?

JK

Is there something you did not understand?

Mel · 22nd April 2003, 09:54 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Wolverine

Will special interest groups keep their noses out of the situation long enough for the suspect to receive a fair trial?

What a potential mess...

Special interest groups prey on 'victims' to further their OWN beliefs. I don't think the RTL'er nuts care about the mothers OR the unborn babies..... they certainly give NO THOUGHT to the quality of life that they would like to force to be born.

This is a mess, I agree. Personally, I'd rather see Scott Peterson spend the next 60 years of his life in a small jail cell. (IF he's guilty, I know)

21st April 2003, 10:08 PM	#1
Wolverine Grumpy Stinky Mustelid Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Austin, TX Posts: 1,690	Laci Peterson case, fetal homicide, and capital punishment Quote: The head of the National Organization for Women's Morris County chapter is opposing a double-murder charge in the Laci Peterson case, saying it could provide ammunition to the pro-life lobby. "If this is murder, well, then any time a late-term fetus is aborted, they could call it murder," Morris County NOW President Mavra Stark said on Saturday. Prosecutors in California announced Friday their intention to charge Scott Peterson, 30, of Modesto, both with killing his wife and their unborn son. Laci Peterson was eight months pregnant when she disappeared Dec. 24. .... Some pro-lifers hope fetal homicide laws will establish a precedent that fetuses are human beings, thereby fueling efforts to reverse the U.S. Supreme Court's 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion. .... The second murder charge against Peterson is crucial because he otherwise would not be eligible for the death penalty. The double-murder charge qualifies as a "special circumstance" for which capital punishment may be sought. (Source.) I had never thought of this case in the context presented here... mainly I was just shocked by the ugly nature of the crime. What sort of precedent will be set by this case? I read that there are 27 states which have "fetal homicide" legislation on the books, thereby providing the means for a perp who kills a pregnant woman to be charged with the death of the unborn child in addition to the adult. In California's case, it allows for prosecutors to seek the death penalty. Could this be expanded in an attempt to set a precedent that abortion is murder? Will special interest groups keep their noses out of the situation long enough for the suspect to receive a fair trial? What a potential mess...

22nd April 2003, 04:44 AM	#2
iain Graduate Poster Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 1,293	Where do you draw the line and say that killing a baby or fetus is murder? I don't think there is any clear place. For some, anything after the moment of conception counts as murder. For the ancient Greeks and many other cultures killing unwanted babies was not considered murder. Myself I would go with it only being murder after the baby is born. I can't say I have a firm logical basis for this : a baby doesn't change much during birth apart from being inside rather than outside. But you've got to draw the line somewhere and I don't think any other point is better.
iain Graduate Poster Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 1,293	__________________ "Mathematicians have discovered a new whole number between 27 and 28." - On the Hour

22nd April 2003, 05:05 AM	#3
Denise Succubus Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 2,869	I think that maybe the prosecuter could go for violating Lacy's parental rights or choice. Are there a lot of abortions taking place in the eighth month? But if we made a fetus a person in utero all kinds of other issues would pop up. What if a woman is six months pregnant and is murdered by someone who didn't know she was pregnant. Is that person guilty of a double homocide? I don't think so. But clearly Scott knew his wife was pregnant so his intent was to harm the child when he killed Lacy. Definitely a connundrum. Hope I spelled that right.
Denise Succubus Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 2,869	__________________ Sundog- Do the words Biosphere 2 convey anything to anyone?

22nd April 2003, 05:13 AM	#4
ssibal Guest Posts: n/a	I am pro abortion, but if a woman is pregnant and wants to give birth, I see no problem with charging someone with murder if they kill the fetus. But I think the prosecution should have to prove that the suspect knew the woman was pregnant and either targeted the fetus or did not care.
ssibal Guest Posts: n/a

22nd April 2003, 05:18 AM	#5
Incitatus Guest Posts: n/a	Quote: Originally posted by Denise I think that maybe the prosecuter could go for violating Lacy's parental rights or choice. Are there a lot of abortions taking place in the eighth month? But if we made a fetus a person in utero all kinds of other issues would pop up. What if a woman is six months pregnant and is murdered by someone who didn't know she was pregnant. Is that person guilty of a double homocide? I don't think so. But clearly Scott knew his wife was pregnant so his intent was to harm the child when he killed Lacy. Definitely a connundrum. Hope I spelled that right. Indeed. I think that in the US, abortions are within the first trimester, except for the so-called partial birth abortions. The issue is, I think, that the call is the mother's. That is to say if he wants the child it is murder. A tough one and once aagaain the "leaders" play politics. --one "n" I think. Did you really mean "homo" cide?
Incitatus Guest Posts: n/a

22nd April 2003, 05:19 AM	#6
dmarker Muse Join Date: Sep 2001 Posts: 516	Quote: Originally posted by Denise I think that maybe the prosecuter could go for violating Lacy's parental rights or choice. Are there a lot of abortions taking place in the eighth month? But if we made a fetus a person in utero all kinds of other issues would pop up. The problem with abortion numbers is that no one separates those fetuses which have died naturally and must be removed or those which are induced. But either way, an eighth month abortion is pretty rare only 2% of abortions are beyond the twentieth week. And that does include those fetuses which have died and must be removed.
dmarker Muse Join Date: Sep 2001 Posts: 516	__________________ Mean, nasty, and contentious

22nd April 2003, 06:34 AM	#7
Smalso Guest Posts: n/a	Quote: What if a woman is six months pregnant and is murdered by someone who didn't know she was pregnant. Is that person guilty of a double homocide? I don't think so I believe there is a principle in law that a person takes his victims as he finds them. Depending on the law regarding fetal homocide, it would make no difference, therefore, whether the perpertrator knew she was pregnant or not.
Smalso Guest Posts: n/a

22nd April 2003, 06:43 AM	#8
Tmy Philosopher Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Republic of Massachusetts Posts: 6,489	I figure that she had no intention of getting an abortion so the fetus was on its way to being born. Sure she couldve changed her mind but thats unlikely. Sort of like suing for future earnings. I would guess that the killer would have to know she was preggy, after allshe was far along. Now what if Laci was on her way to the abortion clinic when she was killed? I guess that would still be double murder since the killer did not have the athourity to take the childs life.

22nd April 2003, 06:54 AM	#9
Smalso Guest Posts: n/a	Denise: Quote: But clearly Scott knew his wife was pregnant so his intent was to harm the child when he killed Lacy. Definitely a connundrum. Hope I spelled that right. IF he killed Laci. The 48 Hour Rule applies.
Smalso Guest Posts: n/a

22nd April 2003, 06:55 AM	#10
Jedi Knight Banned Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 2,734	Quote: Originally posted by ssibal I am pro abortion, but if a woman is pregnant and wants to give birth, I see no problem with charging someone with murder if they kill the fetus. But I think the prosecution should have to prove that the suspect knew the woman was pregnant and either targeted the fetus or did not care. huh? JK
Jedi Knight Banned Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 2,734

22nd April 2003, 07:03 AM	#11
Tricky Briefly immortal Moderator Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: The Group W bench Posts: 42,371	[Jedi Knight mode] If he killed her, it was only because the matriarchal totalitarian society drove him to it. However, the woman is a criminal for putting her fetus in danger, so her death is just the execution she deserved.[/Jedi Knight mode]

22nd April 2003, 07:15 AM	#12
Denise Succubus Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 2,869	Quote: Originally posted by Tricky [Jedi Knight mode] If he killed her, it was only because the matriarchal totalitarian society drove him to it. However, the woman is a criminal for putting her fetus in danger, so her death is just the execution she deserved.[/Jedi Knight mode] Ooh! That was good! More more!
Denise Succubus Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 2,869	__________________ Sundog- Do the words Biosphere 2 convey anything to anyone?

22nd April 2003, 07:16 AM	#13
Denise Succubus Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 2,869	Quote: Originally posted by Smalso Denise: IF he killed Laci. The 48 Hour Rule applies. Yep, thanks for calling me on that. Absolutely unproven at the moment.
Denise Succubus Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 2,869	__________________ Sundog- Do the words Biosphere 2 convey anything to anyone?

22nd April 2003, 07:21 AM	#14
Tmy Philosopher Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Republic of Massachusetts Posts: 6,489	I think we'll need more than 48 hrs. I always love these editorial newscasters who say silly things like "Well If my pregnant wife was decapitated and washed up along the shore......thats not how I would act." AS if there's an Idiots Guide to the subject. Ahhh forget it.....he's guilty!

22nd April 2003, 09:11 AM	#15
NoZed Avenger Bitter Whiner Join Date: Apr 2002 Posts: 11,313	Quote: Originally posted by Smalso I believe there is a principle in law that a person takes his victims as he finds them. Depending on the law regarding fetal homocide, it would make no difference, therefore, whether the perpertrator knew she was pregnant or not. In criminal law, intent matters a great deal on most issues. Without knowledge, there could be no intent to kill. NA

22nd April 2003, 09:18 AM	#16
ssibal Guest Posts: n/a	Quote: Originally posted by Jedi Knight huh? JK Is there something you did not understand?
ssibal Guest Posts: n/a

22nd April 2003, 09:54 AM	#17
Mel Muse Join Date: Mar 2002 Posts: 552	Re: Laci Peterson case, fetal homicide, and capital punishment Quote: Originally posted by Wolverine Will special interest groups keep their noses out of the situation long enough for the suspect to receive a fair trial? What a potential mess... Special interest groups prey on 'victims' to further their OWN beliefs. I don't think the RTL'er nuts care about the mothers OR the unborn babies..... they certainly give NO THOUGHT to the quality of life that they would like to force to be born. This is a mess, I agree. Personally, I'd rather see Scott Peterson spend the next 60 years of his life in a small jail cell. (IF he's guilty, I know)
Mel Muse Join Date: Mar 2002 Posts: 552	__________________ "It's a magical world, Hobbes, ol' buddy... Let's go exploring!" -- Calvin's final words