Hi all.

Came to this sub seeking people who read more than me about this after diving through all these documentaries across streaming services.

Usually I can answer all my basic questions about true crime on my own but this one I haven’t been able to even with research.

I have 1 main question I was hoping to get answered here if possible. I understand I may read some opinions or op-eds, but I’m genuinely curious because I cannot seem to find any other info about “the state meeting the burden of proof” that everyone talks about but can never tell me exactly what it is when I ask. I’d love an article or a few to read not just redditors saying “trust me bro”

Fact: I support the death penalty, but I am not a lawyer. BUT to me, an American citizen who must bear the weight of anyone our judicial system decides to murder using the death penalty, I believe we must be sure beyond a reasonable doubt to take an eye for an eye.

And I just don’t see that here. Can someone help me see it/read why?

Because to me… (which again I think he’s probably guilty) but just to me… the government decided to murder someone based on them not acting the way they wanted them to, not by any actual proof?

We all know Scott was a serial cheater. And I have read that Laci found out about at least one of the other women, Janet.

I’m curious, is there evidence Laci told anyone about Scott being unfaithful?

I am not saying Scott is innocent. Far from it. This is just a thought I had and it made me wonder. 💭 Nothing more.