The headline from cnn.com reads, "Jurors: Peterson's lack of emotion doomed him"
You know, I hate crap like this. A man dies for not showing emotion. Does that make sense? Was he asked to show emotion? Was he conditioned or advised not to? Why not make the decision based on the testimony presented rather than what the dude is doing sitting on the other side of the room?
This is independent of the crime, in my opinion, and a major failing of our civilization. I'm sure those in the courtroom, including the jurors, were advised against showing emotion...maybe they should all die too? No...wait, something isn't consistent.
I suppose I'm also bothered by the fact that the evidence here was entirely circumstantial. Did he kill his wife? Probably. Is it iron-clad certain? No. The definition of proof in this case was determined by a group of average people, the same people who are manipulated by advertising, political sound-bites, and our instant culture. This system makes mistakes, and a high number of them as shown by all the DNA-based exonerations in recent years.
I think we can do better. Issues of life and death shouldn't be trusted to emotions.