PDA

View Full Version : Anyone following Scott Peterson Trial?



Gayle in MD
11-06-2004, 11:41 AM
Just wondering if I am the only one trying to figure out this one.

What's your take on it?

Love,
Gayle in Md. /ccboard/images/graemlins/confused.gif

Troy
11-06-2004, 12:20 PM
My wife thinks he either did it, or was at least involved somehow.

I don't think the prosecution proved the case "beyond reasonable doubt". Also, I don't think he's dumb enough (or smart enough ??) to say he was at the precise place where the bodies were later found if he actually did the killing.

Troy...~~~ Lives less than 50 miles from the trial.
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Gayle in MD:</font><hr> Just wondering if I am the only one trying to figure out this one.

What's your take on it?

Love,
Gayle in Md. /ccboard/images/graemlins/confused.gif <hr /></blockquote>

Popcorn
11-06-2004, 06:11 PM
quote
" Also, I don't think he's dumb enough (or smart enough ??) to say he was at the precise place where the bodies were later found if he actually did the killing."

I don't think he had a choice, he was seen. One interesting thing is a taped conversation that was not played for the jury. It has his mother saying not to admit to anything and stick with his story. I guess the fruit doesn't fall far from the tree. They are all a bunch of liars.

Gayle in MD
11-06-2004, 06:24 PM
Hi there friend,

Well, it certainly is an in intriguing case. I am glad I am not on the jury, LOL. Never have I followed a case which has left me so at odds with myself about what to think.

You know he gave several different stories about where he was that day, It is possible that since he knew was seen at the boat ramp, he would cover himself later by admitting he was there.

I can't understand why, if someone else killed her, they would take the chance of carrying the body so far away (90 miles) to get rid of it. Also, it looks pretty sure that the body was weighted down somehow under the water, and the baby expelled after Laci died, and in the water. If someone wanted to frame him, why would they weight the body down?

Also, what man whose wife is pregnant is going to sit her down and tell her about an affair, then follow up by buying himself a new boat when there is a new baby on the way, and she deosn't even have enough money to buy Christmas presents? Not to mention all the Amber Fry stuff, which was very damning.

An incredible number of circumstances if he didn't do it. I think he is so laid back, and they made such an attractive couple, one doesn't want to believe that he did it, but if he didn't, he sure has been one unlucky guy, LOL.

Gayle in Md. /ccboard/images/graemlins/confused.gif

If he didn't kill her, why did he take rental cars and drive 90 miles on several occasions to check out the bay. both before and during the search, and then lie, even to his mother about where he was on those days?

Why would he be making those small anchors? They didn't weigh enough to anchor the boat.

You probably know all the things he did that made it seem that he knew all along that she was never returning.

Although there is no forensic evidence, the circumstantial evidence is pretty powerful.

wonder what the odds are that a mans wife would vanish, then turn up a mile away from where he was in the bay three or four months later.

Cueless Joey
11-07-2004, 01:31 AM
I think when someone cries on national tv during an interview and starts proclaiming his/her innocence, he/she is guilty. /ccboard/images/graemlins/tongue.gif
Joey~Will never be a good juror~

Deeman2
11-07-2004, 07:38 AM
I think the clown is either guilty or very unlucky. However, the prosecution does not seem to be proving much beyond circumstance. From the accounts I have heard, he should at least be convicted of being stupid and just maybe, someone who treats his pregnant wife the way he did deserves whatever he gets. If he's just a louse, maybe a murder conviction is too stiff but I swear, usually where there's smoke there's fire and he's got a lot of little blazes going on.....

Deeman

Troy
11-07-2004, 09:08 AM
I find it interesting that yes, he was seen at the Marina, but nobody came forward testifying that he was carrying a large bundle to the boat. Seems to me that carrying a bundle to a boat would be easier to remember than simply seeing the person.

Also, "not to admit to anything and stick with his story" is standard lawyer speak.

I hadn't heard "that they are all a bunch of liars". I don't think that was mentioned in court during any testimony.

Troy
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Popcorn:</font><hr> quote
" Also, I don't think he's dumb enough (or smart enough ??) to say he was at the precise place where the bodies were later found if he actually did the killing."

I don't think he had a choice, he was seen. One interesting thing is a taped conversation that was not played for the jury. It has his mother saying not to admit to anything and stick with his story. I guess the fruit doesn't fall far from the tree. They are all a bunch of liars. <hr /></blockquote>

Gayle in MD
11-07-2004, 11:15 AM
I think the prosecutions theory is that after he killed her,(At Home) he wrapped her in a tarp, backed his truck up to the side door of the house, put her in a tool box, one of those large type that are the width of the truck bed. and rest behind the cab area, drove to his warehouse, which housed the boat, backed the truck up to the bay door, put her in the boat, covered her up with a secured tarp, and drove to the marina.

Also, his excuse for going to the warehouse was that he had to take some large lawn type unbrellas there for storage, but funny thing, he forgot to leave them there.

The police found a tarp in the shed at his home, which had been placed under a leaky piece of lawn equipment, and was covered with gasoline, which would have destroyed any forensic evidence.

I thought the most damning circumstancial evidence, other than where the bodies turned up, was the recording of Scott's response while listening to a message from his mother-in-law. She tells him that the report regarding the police finding something in the bay which they had brought up from the bottem, had turned out to be just an anchor. When he hears this he lets out a whistle of relief.

Wonder how long they will deliberate, and if they will dead-lock?

Gayle in Md.

Ross
11-07-2004, 12:40 PM
Guilty, guilty, guilty. However, high priced lawyers can put preposterous doubts in juries minds, a la OJ. What is it about California and high profile wife killing? OJ, Blake, and now Peterson.

Interestingly, here in Durham we recently convicted our own guy named Peterson for killing his wife during the Christmas holidays in 2002. He is a prominent novel author, politico, and former writer for the local paper. She is high up the corporate ladder at Nortel. Xmas eve, he and his wife have a few drinks celebrating a book publishing deal at home around midnight, wife "falls" down the stairs and dies. He calls 911 sounding distraught. Unfortunately for him there was so much blood in the stairwell and so many skull injuries inconsistent with a fall that the jury didn't buy it.

He is in prison now. Interestingly, this is the second woman friend of his that mysteriously died after a fall down the stairs. He adopted this first dead womans children and they still beleive he is innocent. So they are not on speaking terms with their formerly close step-siblings (children of the second woman killed) who believe Peterson was guilty of the murder of their mom. There was even a gay call guy that the husband tried to hook up with on the stand. Some of you may have seen this story on court tv or a made for tv movie. Few novels had more twists than this true story.

What is it about xmas that makes husbands go beserk? Do they hate shopping and wrapping presents that bad???

Popcorn
11-07-2004, 01:15 PM
quote
"Also, "not to admit to anything and stick with his story" is standard lawyer speak. "

This advice came in a taped conversation with his mother, not "Tell the truth Scott". I think they thought he did it themselves.

He may have been seen leaving, or seen by someone who was themselves leaving. They did not have to see him for more then a second for Scott to be afraid it would mess up his story and have not observed anything much beyond that.

wolfdancer
11-08-2004, 09:04 AM
I have three other possible suspects in mind:
O.J.
The one-armed guy
Bruno Hauptmann
I think Scott is quilty, but like Troy says, they haven't proved the case...he'll probably walk