Here's one that could be a bit more controversial... don't worry.. the flower girls can see this one.

My opinion is pretty straight-forward.

I couldn't care less about this woman or anything she has to say. She's being made into a fool by whomever is advising her to do this. (Could be her own self).

She is a parasite and she ought to be ashamed of herself because it's only because of a mother's and her child's death that anyone knows her name.

GO AWAY!!!

Of course, this is only my opinion. I could be wrong. (But I doubt it this time.)

I'd have to agree you - but I also think its the media's fault also for allowing her story to be toldeverywhere .

---

Posted by nov04LIbride

I know. It also sickens me that Monica Lewinsky became so famous and had her own talk show after her scandal...

---

Agreed.

Now I'll say something controversial --

The problem with today's world is that we have lost the concept of shame. (Shame in and of itself, is not a bad thing. In fact, it can be a very good thing.)

Both of these 'instances' (Lewinsky and Frey) demonstrate wrong behaviour that has been celebrated by a salicious media clamouring for more. Adultery is unacceptable to me.

Unfortunately, the concept of.. 'Don't judge me' has replaced a code of decent and respectable behaviour. IMO

I rest my case. I expect to be flamed for some of this.. It doesn't bother me.. LOL

---

Posted by OctGroom


Now I'll say something controversial --

The problem with today's world is that we have lost the concept of shame. (Shame in and of itself, is not a bad thing. In fact, it can be a very good thing.)

Both of these 'instances' (Lewinsky and Frey) demonstrate wrong behaviour that has been celebrated by a salicious media clamouring for more. Adultery is unacceptable to me.

Unfortunately, the concept of.. 'Don't judge me' has replaced a code of decent and respectable behaviour. IMO

I rest my case. I expect to be flamed for some of this.. It doesn't bother me.. LOL

---

Frey didn't do anything she should be ashamed of! She didn't know Peterson was married and when she found out he was, she broke it off. She helped the investigation!

She wasn't a willing mistress! She was lied to by Peterson!

If she KNEW he was married and still carried on the affair then it's shameful... but she was fooled by a sociopath!

---

Posted by MonkeyLuv

---

Posted by OctGroom


Now I'll say something controversial --

The problem with today's world is that we have lost the concept of shame. (Shame in and of itself, is not a bad thing. In fact, it can be a very good thing.)

Both of these 'instances' (Lewinsky and Frey) demonstrate wrong behaviour that has been celebrated by a salicious media clamouring for more. Adultery is unacceptable to me.

Unfortunately, the concept of.. 'Don't judge me' has replaced a code of decent and respectable behaviour. IMO

I rest my case. I expect to be flamed for some of this.. It doesn't bother me.. LOL

---

Frey didn't do anything she should be ashamed of! She didn't know Peterson was married and when she found out he was, she broke it off. She helped the investigation!

She wasn't a willing mistress! She was lied to by Peterson!

If she KNEW he was married and still carried on the affair then it's shameful... but she was fooled by a sociopath!

---

But now it's time for her to fold the tent in and go home... I think she should take the higher road and just go back to normal life. Helping the cops was not only the right thing to do. She is legally bound to help in the capture and conviction of a sociopath.

Any money and/or any publicity from this is morally wrong. It's time for her to go home.

---

Posted by OctGroom

But now it's time for her to fold the tent in and go home... I think she should take the higher road and just go back to normal life. Helping the cops was not only the right thing to do. She is legally bound to help in the capture and conviction of a sociopath.

Any money and/or any publicity from this is morally wrong. It's time for her to go home.

---

I really disagree with how you view this case and this woman. I think this is an effort to abolish the misnomer 'Mistress' that always accompanies her image. She was not legally bound to do anything. She didn't have to tape her conversations or continue contact with a murderer. She could have quietly slunk away, without lifting a finger and been branded a 'slut'. To say she should 'take the higher road and just go back to normal life' is so condescending and dismissive. This woman was lied to, tricked, had the moral fortitude to put herself on the line and you think she has a normal life to go back to now? I also believe that your POV is further proof that this country loves to villanize women for even the the most tenuous reasons.

ETA: How do you feel about the jurors publishing books etc?

---

Posted by MonkeyLuv

---

Posted by OctGroom

But now it's time for her to fold the tent in and go home... I think she should take the higher road and just go back to normal life. Helping the cops was not only the right thing to do. She is legally bound to help in the capture and conviction of a sociopath.

Any money and/or any publicity from this is morally wrong. It's time for her to go home.

---

I really disagree with how you view this case and this woman. I think this is an effort to abolish the misnomer 'Mistress' that always accompanies her image. She was not legally bound to do anything. She didn't have to tape her conversations or continue contact with a murderer. She could have quietly slunk away, without lifting a finger and been branded a 'slut'. To say she should 'take the higher road and just go back to normal life' is so condescending and dismissive. This woman was lied to, tricked, had the moral fortitude to put herself on the line and you think she has a normal life to go back to now? I also believe that your POV is further proof that this country loves to villanize women for even the the most tenuous reasons.

ETA: How do you feel about the jurors publishing books etc?

---

I disagree with you. (Let me state that I do understand your POV.. I just disagree. No biggie. ) But to me.. each of us has the moral/ethical duty to help in the prosecution and punishment of the guilty. If she knew and did not help the police, she wuld have been aiding and abeting.

I totally disagree with you about the villianization of women. I would be just as tough on a man as on a woman.

To me, the whole crux of my argument is based upon the sanctity and the value of the life of Laci and her son. What I am saying is that Laci's life is so VALUABLE to as a person that no one should be allowed to profit from her in death. Because it all comes down to it, that's what this whole thing is about.

Jurors writing books.. don't even get me started on that one. LOL Seriously.

You're a good debater. And I respect ya.

---

Posted by OctGroom

Jurors writing books.. don't even get me started on that one. LOL Seriously.

---

Thank god, I was one keystroke away from leaping through the screen and throttling you!

My comment about the villainization of women stems directly from the media focusing on Frey's relationship and dubbing her 'Mistress' and 'Lover' while virtually ignoring the fact that Peterson is an unrepentant adulterer.

---

Posted by Dooodles

Okay, I have to agree that Amber was not a willing participant in adultery and ended things with Scott Peterson when she found out he was married. I don't think she is wrong about writing the book on her experience with him. With the world's fascination on reality tv and people's lives, she has a right to share her story. One question before I can judge about the proceeds from the book though, do we actually know if she will profit or donate?

---

Most everybody profits from writing a book except in rare circumstances. If she did donate, I think that would be admirable. But to be honest, I'm not expecting her to.

---

Posted by MonkeyLuv

But she didn't do anything wrong. She was lied to and decieved, just like everyone else involved. Once she found out peterson was lying she aided the police by recording conversations. She remained in seclusion for the bulk of the trial and the only hype and fanfare around her has been generated by the media.

---

This is what I was thinking..

---

Posted by OctGroom

---

Posted by Dooodles

Okay, I have to agree that Amber was not a willing participant in adultery and ended things with Scott Peterson when she found out he was married. I don't think she is wrong about writing the book on her experience with him. With the world's fascination on reality tv and people's lives, she has a right to share her story. One question before I can judge about the proceeds from the book though, do we actually know if she will profit or donate?

---

Most everybody profits from writing a book except in rare circumstances. If she did donate, I think that would be admirable. But to be honest, I'm not expecting her to.

---

I would just hate to judge her on that issue before I knew.

---

Posted by MonkeyLuv

---

Posted by OctGroom

Jurors writing books.. don't even get me started on that one. LOL Seriously.

---

Thank god, I was one keystroke away from leaping through the screen and throttling you!

My comment about the villainization of women stems directly from the media focusing on Frey's relationship and dubbing her 'Mistress' and 'Lover' while virtually ignoring the fact that Peterson is an unrepentant adulterer.

---

The Mistress one seems a bit off base. As for bieng his 'lover'.. well.. I would lean towards that one much more than mistress.

When I think of a mistress.. it is much different for the media's meaning.. HAHA JK!!!!!!

Nevertheless.... the words I have to describe Peterson are MUCH, MUCH worse and probably unprintable here in a family forum.

I could not think any lower of the 'man.'

It is the media's fault for making a big deal about this. So if you were in her place and they threw all this money for a book deal, wouldn't you take it?
Still it doesn't mean I have to like her. I wish she would go away too1

---

Posted by Dooodles

---

Posted by OctGroom

---

Posted by Dooodles

Okay, I have to agree that Amber was not a willing participant in adultery and ended things with Scott Peterson when she found out he was married. I don't think she is wrong about writing the book on her experience with him. With the world's fascination on reality tv and people's lives, she has a right to share her story. One question before I can judge about the proceeds from the book though, do we actually know if she will profit or donate?

---

Most everybody profits from writing a book except in rare circumstances. If she did donate, I think that would be admirable. But to be honest, I'm not expecting her to.

---

I would just hate to judge her on that issue before I knew.

---

Well.. let's find out. Some say prove she has.. others will say prove she hasn't. Let's get to the bottom of this.

And if I'm wrong in this facet of the argument (or even the whole argument).. I'll be the first to admit it.