Convicted killer Scott Peterson is looking for a girlfriend from his jail cell! With an intent to marry her! Who will he choose? Will he find a way to drown her during the conjugal visit? Who Cares!
Who Cares? Magazine, Volume 2, Issue 36
Friday, September 26, 2008
Convicted killer Scott Peterson is looking for a girlfriend from his jail cell! With an intent to marry her! Who will he choose? Will he find a way to drown her during the conjugal visit? Who Cares!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
30 comments:
And he will find LOTS of willing idiots....
I don't get that. Why would anyone consider a murderous whack-job convict to be a "good catch?"
Wrong! He is NOT looking for any female 'friend' - he is still grieving the loss of his family to the psychotic bitch who cut Laci open to steal her baby and wound up killing them both.
Ooooo, I sure hope the previous comment is not serious.....
Amy, I think you know better than that
::snort::
Voice, either way, he's a convicted felon, and I don't care.
Hence, his being featured in my weekly segment.
See how that works?
Why would Scott Peterson cut his own son out of his wife's body while she was still alive? What man would do that? We don't even like to buy tampons - and many of us faint when she gives birth. I don't even like to see them take a blood sample.
No, this is a woman's crime - men just don't do this one unless they are doctors.
Voice, perhaps I'm not making myself clear - I don't care.
Mostly I don't care about the wacky women who would intentionally begin a relationship with an incarcerated felon, but I also don't care about Scott Peterson, aside from a desire to see justice done in a general sense.
DON'T CARE.
Guilty or not, he was convicted, and if he's innocent, it's his attorney's job to appeal on his behalf. Please go grind your axe elsewhere - I doubt you'll find much traction here.
Because we DON'T CARE.
No, this is a woman's crime - men just don't do this one unless they are doctors.
Wha?!
Dude. Read much about the history of warfare for the past ten thousand years?
Here's a shocker for you - soldiers don't try to cut a live baby out of a pregnant woman as a normal part of warfare. So the 'history of warfare' has no relevance here.
Janiece Murphy said...
Voice, perhaps I'm not making myself clear - I don't care.
If you don't care why did you use him as an example? Why not choose someone who DID kill his wife like Allen Blackthorne, Fred Tokars or Jim Sullivan? They actually did have their wives killed whereas Scott Peterson would have given his own life to protect his wife or his son.
Woah. Flame war! :D
*munches popcorn*
Voice, I simply don't know how to make this any clearer for you.
Scott Peterson was convicted. That means he was found guilty. Whether you believe that is true or not is not the issue here, on any level. Your attempts to redirect the point of the discussion on my blog to the point of the discussion on your blog will not be tolerated. The simple fact is: He was convicted. Therefore, he's a felon. I don't care about your theories regarding who the "real" killer is, I don't care about your sexist hyperbole, I don't care about your ill-informed ideas about the nature of warfare. If you want to discuss such dreck, please feel to do so - on your own blog. Any future comments pertaining to Peterson's guilt or innocence will be met with The Shovel of Doom™
The point of this entry is that there are women out there who think it's just a fabulous idea to try and establish a romantic relationship with a convicted felon. Which Scott Peterson is. If you have a comment on that topic, feel free to contribute.
The only sexist here is you. You made false claims about Peterson and I called you on them. If you choose to be a coward, go to it but a coward is what you will be.
Hee! I'm a sexist! And a coward! Says the person who posts under her real name...Voice.
Voice, please defend your claim that I made "false claims" about Peterson. He is, in fact, someone who is convicted of killing someone else. That is (demonstrably) not false.
The girlfriend seeking commentary was caged from "The Globe," just one of many sources I use for this satirical segment, and can only be described as hyperbole.
Do you so vociferously attack other forms of satire and hyperbole, or is Peterson a special case?
Wait, let me get a Mt. Dew and something to munch for this show.
Sic 'em J.
You said: "Convicted killer Scott Peterson is looking for a girlfriend from his jail cell!"
The fact is that he has no interest in these women - why would he have? So your statement is false. Why not use Richard Ramirez as an example? He also gets mail from women.
As for my online name, are you currently being stalked? Because I am.
And yes, Peterson is a special case because unlike, say, Robert Blake, I can say to an absolute certainty that he is not guilty. I can say this because the state spent (they admit) $11 million to get him - and still could not find even one piece of evidence against him. All of the evidence was in his favor - some of it overwhelmingly so.
Hm. Clearly you have some personal stake in this matter.
Which means you either a) had a preexisting relationship with Scott Peterson prior to his wife's death; or b) have developed a personal relationship with Scott Peterson after his wife's death.
In the case of "a," I can only say I'm sorry for your trouble, and invite you to move along. I have no interest in discussing Scott Peterson's innocence or guilt, and as previously discussed, this is not the forum to do so. Please keep your (understandable) crusade to your own space.
In the case of "b," I can only say, unless you are a legal professional who has taken an interest in this matter a la "The Innocence Project," please seek help. Seriously.
Either way, I think your opinion is less than objective about the veracity of the evidence against him.
This conversation is closed, because I do have other things to do today, and I'm starting to feel like I'm kicking my dog or something.
Good luck in your future endeavors.
No wait Janiece! Keep playing!
I'm still boggled about the claims about cutting babies out of the womb is a "woman's crime"!
Now, Michelle, play nice.
Voice, I warned you. I tried to be civil. I tried to be understanding. Now? Not so much.
*TONG*
Make your case somewhere else. Not here. This is my space, and I will not permit you to hijack it for whatever axe you need to grind.
*TONG*
Yay shovels! :)
Well, it is your blog.
And trolls *do* tend to start to smell rather quickly.
Wait?! Did you get called a bad journalist and opposed to free speech for applying the Shovel of Doom?
Those are the *best* lines. Unless of course Godwin's law was invoked.
You are my moderating hero.
You are a master of the The Shovel of Doom™ and I bow before you. :)
No Godwin's Law. I'm just a "coward" for refusing to debate Scott Peterson's guilt or innocence when really...
I DON'T CARE!
And so we come full circle...
*giggles*
What was the IP address of "Voice", Janiece?
Convicts are allowed internet access, don't you know. It sounds a lot like someone was trying to defend himself.
Ah, such disillusionment.
The whole killing thing aside, (I know, it's a big condition for future relationships) but hear me out, had Laci actually lived, he was cheating on her while she was pregnant with his child.
Come on. That's Grade A beef right there!
*snorkle*
Kate, you make me laugh.
I wondered about that, too. Just like I wondered about how "Voice" knows "for a fact" that Scott Peterson isn't trying to pursue a female friend, and in the next breath claimed that that he/she didn't know Scott Peterson or any member of his family.
That's pretty specific information for an interested observer. Just sayin'.
Post a Comment