By Dennis Lynch


It was a double murder? Or wasn't it. That is the mystery.

Scott Peterson's wife was viciously murdered. Her body was found near the shoreline. Worse yet, the Peterson's unborn child was found not too far away. Both had been dead for weeks. This seemed like the classic double murder mystery. Or was it?

I wasn't sure if it was a double murder since a few days after Mrs. Peterson and their unborn child were found dead, there was a photograph in the local Gannett newspaper. The photograph showed people "Marching against Violence". The group had several banners opposing violence and demanding "Justice" for Mrs. Peterson. Yet, there was no mention of the unborn Peterson child found equally as dead as Mrs. Peterson. Why did this group not want "justice for the unborn child" also? Why was the unborn child missing from their banners? This seemed like a real mystery - the mystery of the missing unborn Peterson child.

I tried to solve the mystery by continuing to read the local Gannett chain story accompanying the photograph, but the mystery just continued. Several groups marching "Against Domestic Violence" were mentioned in the article. They were quoted as being totally "opposed to violence in all forms". But where was the mention of the Peterson unborn child who met an equally as violent death as the mother? If people were truly opposed to violence, why didn't the murder of a defenseless child matter? Why did the marchers against violence not include the unborn child in their protest? To solve the mystery, I tried to recall even one Gannett newspaper editorial against killing unborn children. I couldn't remember even one. I was beginning to solve this mystery.

I searched a national newspaper for another story about the Peterson Family as I continued to solve this mystery. The New York Times in its April 26, 2003 edition mentioned that Mrs. Peterson was "eight months pregnant" and that "Ms. Peterson's body, and that of her unborn child" were found not too far from where Scott Peterson was fishing. The New York Times, the paper of record, recognizing what would otherwise be referred to as an eight-month-old "fetus" as now being "her unborn child"? Now that was a true mystery. This was all getting very strange. I had to solve the mystery of the missing Peterson unborn child that groups "against Domestic Violence" never mentioned.

I finally began to solve the mystery of the missing Peterson unborn child - a sometimes double murder mystery. Tell me if I solved the mystery right.

First, the New York Times does not recognize an unborn child unless it is dead. If the unborn child is alive, then it is a "fetus" not an "unborn child".

Second, if a man kills an unborn child it is murder ---unless that man is performing an abortion, which the New York Times and the Gannett chain accept as not being murder.

Third, if you plan to kill your unborn child, the New York Times and the Gannett chain find it acceptable as long as you call the unborn child a "fetus".

Fourth, according to the Gannett newspaper chain, it is acceptable to kill an unborn child----but just don't kill the unborn child's mother.

Fifth, if you support or condone violence against unborn children, you can still claim to be against domestic violence and get your picture in a Gannet newspaper.

Sixth, the sooner the New York Times and the Gannett chain can get their readers to focus on the killer (maybe Mr. Peterson) rather than the victims (certainly Mrs. Peterson and her unborn child), the happier all the pro-abortionists, their enablers and the editorial writers at the New York Times and the Gannett chain will be.

Mystery solved?

_______________________________________

Dennis Lynch is an Attorney in New York City. He is also Chief-of-Staff for Your Catholic Voice.

Contact

Catholic Online
http://www.catholic.org  CA, US
Dennis Lynch - Attorney - Chief-of-Staff, 661 869-1000

Email

colirf@catholic.org

Keywords

Pro-life, Abortion