And it's a sad gesture. The evidence used to convict him was circumstantial, and while I don't think a murder conviction should be based on circumstantial evidence, and while I am 100% against the death penalty, if it must be used, I certainly don't think a death sentence should be imposed based on this type of evidence.
i got a little inside secret for ya - most criminals are convicted on circumstantial evidence.
While some criminals are convicted on circumstantial evidence, its a VAST generalization to say that MOST convictions are based on that type of evidence. I never said I don't think Peterson killed her; I simply said that there wasn't enough hard evidence to convict him beyone a reasonable doubt.
Turning to the penalty for a second; even assuming that the death penalty was morally right, I still maintain that in order to sentence someone to death, a jury ought to have more than just circumstantial evidence.