Peterson sentenced
I’ve not really followed it but it seems that a jury has convicted Scott Peterson should be executed for murdering his pregnant wife. But this is the part that gets me:
Judge Alfred A. Delucchi will formally sentence Peterson on Feb. 25. The judge will have the option of reducing the sentence to life, but such a move is highly unlikely.
Trial by jury would also denote a sentencing by the same. Why does the judge have any say in this at all?
December 14th, 2004 at 12:55 pm
This is pretty standard stuff. Juries issue verdicts, not judgments, and they recommend sentences, they don’t get to impose them on their own. Of course, as with any death sentence in California, this judge will be the first of a long line of judges to review the case before the sentence is carried out, if it is carried out. We may be the nation’s most popolous state, and we may have re-instituted the death penalty way back in 1978, but unless you were born with a birth defect or suffered a terrible accident, you can literally count all the people we’ve executed since then on both hands.
December 14th, 2004 at 5:18 pm
Judges retain a “veto” power because juries can and do render verdicts that are unsupported by the evidence. Consider it part of the system of checks and balances in the legal system.
December 14th, 2004 at 5:25 pm
And judges don’t?
December 14th, 2004 at 7:57 pm
Sure they do, but anyone who waives the right to trial by jury is in no position to complain about that.
December 14th, 2004 at 8:33 pm
Trial and sentencing are two different phases. You are tried to determine guilt. Once that happens, you are sentenced.