The Lynching of Scott Peterson
By Candace Marra
September 18, 2005
The angry crowd jeered wildly as the police hauled the prisoner to jail. The mob
of 300 people seemed impatient to see this person hang for the terrible crimes
they knew he had committed. The police could scarcely make their way through the
angry mob. This suspect was not a black man in the post-civil war deep south.
This suspect was not Billy the Kid or some other infamous outlaw from the Old
West. This suspect was a middle-class white man in California in the year 2003.
His name was Scott Peterson.
It wasn’t the last time Scott would face a crowd reminiscent of the lynch mobs
from days of old. A similar crowd gathered outside the courthouse to await his
trial verdict a year and seven months later. This crowd cheered so loudly it
could be heard in the upstairs courtroom. Another angry mob waited outside for
his death verdict following the penalty phase of the trial, a month later,
again, cheering the decision.
Sadly, mankind has demonstrated a penchant for witnessing and even carrying out
cruel executions throughout history. Executions have often been treated as a
form of entertainment, which even the most civilized of cultures have succumbed
to. This is a tragic display of one of the darkest aspects of the human psyche.
It must be at the core of human nature, because the lynch mob mentality has
reared its ugly head in all ages of society, and in all types of civilization,
from the most primitive to the most civilized.
The Roman Empire
Although the average Roman citizen appeared no more bloodthirsty than you or I,
the ancient Roman Empire is most often remembered for its gladiatorial games.
These games consisted of men fighting, literally to the death. These events were
so popular that people would start lining up the night before, and fights would
often break out between latecomers vying for the last seats. These events were
such an important part of Roman culture, that they were free to the public, a
right, rather than a privilege. (http://www.roman-empire.net/society/soc-games.html,
Illustrated History of The Roman Empire: The Games).
Likewise, public executions enjoyed large crowds and involved gruesome deaths
for those being executed. Many times, the criminals had to act out the part of a
criminal or martyr in a play, which would end with his execution. The method of
execution often involved an attack of a wild animal, such as a lion or a bear.
Whatever method was employed, it was always violent and gruesome. And the more
violent and gruesome it was, the more it pleased the crowd. (Ibid.)
And who can forget the awful scene of the angry mob that demanded the
crucifixion of Christ? While this was a Jewish crowd, the execution itself was
carried out by the Roman government. Crucifixion was a popular means of
execution for the Romans. Crosses laden with dying criminals would often dot the
countryside for miles.
Renaissance England
Even a society as civilized as England found its citizens unable to resist this
primal behavior. Executions were carried out at Tyburn, where a triple gallows
had been built, and as many as 24 condemned prisoners could be hanged at one
time. Crowds regularly numbered in the tens of thousands, and in the most
high-profile cases, over 100,000. The crowds would follow the carts carrying the
condemned, cheering all the way to the gallows throughout the two-hour trip.
(http://www.evergreen.loyola.edu/~cmitchell/tyburn.htm, Executions at Tyburn, by
Dr. Charlie Mitchell).
United States
Perhaps no country’s history provides a sadder commentary on this primal
behavior than our own. This phenomenon of apparent bloodthirstiness in otherwise
non-violent, everyday people rose to prominence during a number of eras in
United States history.
In 1692, the infamous Salem witch trials took place. What an embarrassing
blemish on our history this has become! Although these witch hunts occurred only
over the course of months, they resulted in the wrongful executions of twenty
innocent people, the execution of one man who refused to stand trial, the deaths
of four innocent people while imprisoned, the execution of two dogs (yes, they
were accused of being witches), and the wrongful imprisonment of about 200
others. It all started when a few pre-teen and teenage girls who were involved
in fortune-telling (considered by the Puritans a form of witchcraft itself),
began to make accusations against other people for being witches. Some of these
girls had suffered from strange convulsions and began accusing unpopular people
in the village of being witches and placing spells on them. Their charges were
believed in this Puritan community, and the series of farce trials and wrongful
executions ensued. Thankfully, skepticism won out in the end, but until that
time, the thirst for blood was rampant, and the public outrage was surprisingly
absent. In fact, this all happened in full view of the public eye, with its full
approval. (http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/salem/SAL_ACCT.HTM,
An Account of Events in Salem, by Douglas Linder).
During the 1700’s, there was no organized criminal justice system in place, so
many citizens took it upon themselves to enact their own versions of justice.
These vigilantes would most often form organizations that would mete out
terrible punishments for various crimes. These punishments included “tarring and
feathering,” blacklisting, and various methods of cruel, gruesome death. It
wasn’t enough for these bloodthirsty people to see to it that justice was
done—they were often only satisfied when they subjected the accused to slow,
tortuous deaths. Even worse, there was no due process to be sure they had the
right person. Death by hanging was a popular execution method with these groups,
especially as they began to execute mass numbers of people. The groups came to
be known as “lynch mobs.” (http://faculty.ncwc.edu/toconnor/300/300lect10.htm,
Vigilantism, Vigilante Justice, and Victim Self-Help).
Lynch mobs became increasingly prominent in the deep south during the post-civil
war era, Most of the victims were young black men, who had been accused of
murder, theft, or even minor, non-violent crimes. Often, there was no crime
committed at all. Blacks were hated during this terrible time in our history,
and as a result, suffered some of the cruelest punishments ever administered in
the history of our great nation. The crowds generally numbered from 50-500
people, who would cheer as the victim was humiliated, tortured, and killed,
through the cruelest of methods, including slow burning, cutting off of body
parts (including castration), hanging, beating, or whatever imaginative methods
they could come up with. It is hard for me to comprehend how a crowd of average
people could watch something like that and cheer. Even law enforcement enjoyed
the show. The courts did nothing to try to end these brutalities. The Ku Klux
Klan was well-known for public lynchings, although the lynchings began long
before it formed. Often, today, when we think of the KKK, we think of the cruel
lynchings, yet this group was no worse than the average citizens who
participated and/or cheered on these lynchings prior to its formation.
(http://www.crimelibrary.com/notorious_murders/mass/lynching/index_1.html?sect=7,
Lynchings in America, by Mark Gado).
Modern Day Executions
Today, in America, executions are carried out in private, generally with little
fanfare. There are, of course, exceptions. Many of the high profile cases that
result in the death penalty present yet another opportunity for Americans to
show that they have still not overcome their primal, bloodthirsty tendencies.
Who can forget the scene outside the prison in Florida, where Ted Bundy was
executed? Ted Bundy admitted to the brutal rapes and slayings of 28 women, and
may have been guilty of much more. Certainly, if anyone deserved the death
penalty, it was Ted Bundy. But is the execution of a criminal something to
celebrate? The crowds outside the prison had picket signs, which read, “Hey,
Ted, You’re Dead,” and “Thank God It’s Fryday,” among other things. People shot
off fireworks. They cheered, as if they were at a ball game and their team had
just won. Brutal murderer that he was, he was still a human being. How is it
that we can allow ourselves to harden so much that we fail to pity a man who has
caused himself to suffer the death penalty?
If Scott Peterson were to be executed tomorrow, could we expect any different?
Based on the mob-like mentality of the crowds that have accompanied Scott’s
arrest, guilty verdict, and death verdict, I think not. These crowds seemed as
if they were just daring someone to set Scott free so they could kill him
themselves. One way or another, they were going to see that Scott Peterson was
punished.
Because we now have an organized justice system in place, there is no more room
for vigilantism. We occasionally hear about people who have been arrested and
prosecuted after trying to take the law into their own hands. Public lynchings,
in the true sense of the term, are a thing of the past, just another dark mark
on our history.
Yet vigilantism has not died. Vigilantism was alive and well the day Scott
Peterson was hauled to jail. It was alive and well on November 12, 2004, when
the guilty verdict was read. It was alive and well on December 13, 2004, when
the death verdict was read. While it is true that nobody lynched Scott Peterson
on any one of those days, the crowds that gathered demonstrated the mentality
behind this type of behavior, and the capability of doing so.
The vigilante mindset does not allow for due process, or for the wheels of
justice to do their work in its own time. People of this mindset want their
version of justice, and they want it now. (http://faculty.ncwc.edu/toconnor/300/300lect10.htm,
Vigilantism, Vigilante Justice, and Victim Self-Help).
It was the vigilante mindset that caused people to give themselves permission to
assume Scott’s guilt without proof. It was the vigilante mindset that led people
to stand outside the jail and the courthouse and cheer his punishment. I hate to
think what this vigilante mindset may have led to had Scott Peterson been
acquitted on November 12, 2004. Would he have survived his first day of freedom?
Trying to describe the way I felt when I heard the cheering of the crowd when
the guilty verdict was read, and when I heard about the crowd’s response to the
death verdict, is difficult. It was sickening. How can anyone rejoice in the
death of another?
While I believe Scott is innocent, I do not see how thinking he is guilty
justifies this celebratory mood surrounding his circumstances. I believe Ted
Bundy is guilty, and of much worse crimes than Scott was convicted of. I even
agree that the death penalty was appropriate for him. Yet let me assure you, I
was not celebrating the day he was executed. I see execution as a somber,
tragic, yet necessary process. I was sad for Ted Bundy, very sad, not because I
felt sorry that he had been given the death penalty, but because I felt sorry
that a man with so much potential for good, threw it all away. I felt sad that
it had to come to that. I felt the same way about Timothy McVeigh, and I often
feel the same sadness for people who even get life in prison. Yes, I want
justice to be done. I believe in punishing those who commit crimes. But it needs
to be handled in a sober manner. It is indeed a tragic thing when a human being
has chosen a lifestyle that led him to deserve such a punishment.
In Scott’s case, no one was more hurt by the murder of Laci and Conner, than
Sharon Rocha. I also don’t believe anyone was more convinced of Scott’s guilt
than Sharon Rocha. I know that Sharon supported the death penalty for Scott, but
her reaction to the death verdict stood in stark contrast to the bloodthirsty
crowd below. She cried. She stated, rather plainly, that this was not a victory
for anyone. It was not even closure for her. I wonder how the crowd’s cheers
made her feel?
We do not live in a society where lynch mobs form and lynch people. We, do
however, live in a society where lynch mobs form. We live in a society in which
the people we rub shoulders with every day could very well be of the same
primal, bloodthirsty persuasion, as those of the Roman Empire, or of the
spectators in early modern England, or of the lynch mobs of the eighteenth and
nineteenth centuries. We live in a world where many are not sad to see their
fellow man put to death, even without proof beyond a reasonable doubt that the
accused is actually guilty. You don’t have to take my word for it. The crowd
outside the courthouse on November 12, 2004, says it all.
David Paul Morris / Getty Images