Re “Peterson Found Guilty of Killing Pregnant Wife,” Nov. 13: For a guy who is smart enough to murder his pregnant wife without leaving any damning physical evidence, the way Scott Peterson acted immediately after his wife’s disappearance and throughout the trial is dumbfounding, not much short of a confession. However, I still can’t help feeling troubled by how this case echoes the O.J. Simpson case: verdicts that are incongruent with the evidence. Simpson was exonerated despite DNA evidence. Peterson was convicted of premeditated murder even though the prosecutor could not show how it was committed.
If I were ever to be accused and convicted of first-degree murder, someone better prove where, when or at least how I had done it. What this case tells us about our justice system is disturbing. At least, unlike the Simpson trial, the outcome feels just this time around.
Young B. Kim
Question: What’s the difference between a jury panel in Northern California (Scott Peterson) versus a jury panel in Southern California (O.J. Simpson)? Answer: Northern California is right on, while Southern California is (fill in the blank)!