Scott Peterson

These cases are suggested by forum members for research and information. Injustice Anywhere has not reviewed the details of each case and does not necessarily endorse any claims made within this section. Cases we currently advocate for can be viewed in the "Injustice Anywhere Featured Cases" section, located in the board index.
Forum rules
These cases are suggested by forum members for research and information. Injustice Anywhere has not reviewed the details of each case and does not necessarily endorse any claims made within this section. Cases we currently advocate for can be viewed in the "Injustice Anywhere Featured Cases" section, located in the board index.

Should we reconsider everything we've been told, when a man's life is on the line

Yes
88
79%
No
23
21%
 
Total votes : 111

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby Nick » Mon Feb 12, 2018 6:53 am

Back to reality. Scott's own attorney's did not offer anything that would grant him a new trial.

Scott Peterson’s celebrity attorney did not botch his blockbuster 2004 trial, and a juror did not lie in order to punish the man accused of murdering his pregnant wife and unborn son in Modesto’s infamous double-murder, authorities say in a new document fighting the appeal of Peterson’s death sentence.

Questioning the performance of Mark Geragos, a television personality and Los Angeles attorney representing Peterson, ignores other “overwhelming evidence” that the Modesto man killed 27-year-old Laci Peterson just before Christmas 2002 and dumped her body in San Francisco Bay, reads the document filed Thursday with the California Supreme Court.

That other evidence includes “his expressed wanderlust and desire to be responsibility-free, which he conveyed to his mistress as the birth of his son neared; buying a boat mere weeks before Laci’s disappearance; ‘fishing’ with the wrong gear on Christmas Eve morning in inclement weather; surreptitious trips to the marina in various rented vehicles after Laci’s disappearance; lies to friends and family concerning his whereabouts.

“The sale of Laci’s car and inquiry into selling their home, including furnishings; subscribing to pornography channels while the search was ongoing; Laci’s and Conner’s bodies washing ashore not far from (Scott) Peterson’s location on the bay; condition of the bodies correlat(ing) with the timing of Laci’s disappearance; and (Scott) Peterson’s disguised appearance and possession of survival gear and copious amounts of cash at the time of his arrest,” the 150-page document says.

“Purported sightings of Laci were legion,” Provenzano said in the document, noting 74 reported sightings in 26 states and overseas. “Most were not viable and none were corroborated,” she said.

Provenzano “did a really good job of debunking the defense allegations,” said Stanislaus County District Attorney Birgit Fladager. She was chief deputy DA when she led the team prosecuting Peterson, whose trial was moved to San Mateo County to escape pervasive publicity in Modesto.

http://www.modbee.com/news/local/crime/ ... 34837.html
Nick
 
Posts: 513
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2017 5:58 am

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby jane » Mon Feb 12, 2018 7:16 am

Well, I certainly have been put in my place, and it’s definitely not here. Bruce, I hope you and the bullies will be very happy together. As of now, Nick (AKA Laci’s Voice and Blue Heron), the bully who previously has been banned from this board, is in charge of the Peterson thread. She’s assisted by Anonshy, who is not only a bully but a phony who makes up things as he goes along.

It has become very clear to me that are very few real people who read on this thread and even fewer who have an actual interest in the facts of the case. Since yesterday, there have been approximately 2300 views on the Peterson thread, confirming my suspicion that there is some kind of automated monitoring by various news services instead of views by individuals.

These facebook pages that support Scott’s innocence have a total of approximately 6000 followers/members at last count. The number increases daily.

Scott Peterson Case – Truth Be Told
Justice For Scott Peterson
Scott Peterson is Innocent
Scott Peterson Appeal Facebook Page
Scott Peterson – What the Public Never Knew

The A&E docuseries has had a significant effect on the public perception of the case. The docuseries is one of the finalists for the New York Festivals TV & Film Awards.

Scott’s appellate attorneys and investigators completely support his innocence. The direct appeal is fully briefed and could be given 60 days notice for oral arguments before the California Supreme Court at any time. There is one more document that will be filed by the defense for the Habeas petition by August 2018.

There are 15 instances of error listed in the Direct Appeal, including judicial error, prosecutorial misconduct, and violations of constitutional rights.

There are 19 claims in the Habeas Petition, including juror misconduct, the presentation of false testimony by the prosecution, ineffective assistance of counsel, and violations of federal and state law.

Scott Peterson is Innocent.
jane
 
Posts: 2794
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:32 am

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby Nick » Mon Feb 12, 2018 9:07 am

anonshy wrote:
Nick wrote:
anonshy wrote:Jane back with more cut and paste from the Pro-Innocence site, does this start a whole new PR Cut and Paste Campaign?

Everything after (With Gems.) is pure speculation! Regardless, When Scott Killed Laci there is no telling what he did with her things. If the Watch did show up in a pawn shop, this goes to Scott's guilt as there is no indication that anyone robed the Peterson home, also t that end, if Laci was trying to sell a piece of jewlery on ebay, it is very ulikely she would continue to wear the item being sold for fear she would lose or damage the item.

you fail again!

Anon

Welcome back Anon. Back? It never ends for yrs with the cut & paste bull crap. When proven wrong a million more times. More cut & paste. Stanks to stay in the most unattainable position forever. They seem to not have a clue the matter is with the higher court. Not delusions on a message board.


Never Left, been here the whole time!

Did you see NDrew's creation date, just another alias for the SPA!

Anon


Why do SPAs insist on using fake names online while pretending to fight for the killer? <scurrilous>
Nick
 
Posts: 513
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2017 5:58 am

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby anonshy » Mon Feb 12, 2018 9:21 am

jane wrote:Well, I certainly have been put in my place, and it’s definitely not here. Bruce, I hope you and the bullies will be very happy together. As of now, Nick (AKA Laci’s Voice and Blue Heron), the bully who previously has been banned from this board, is in charge of the Peterson thread. She’s assisted by Anonshy, who is not only a bully but a phony who makes up things as he goes along.

It has become very clear to me that are very few real people who read on this thread and even fewer who have an actual interest in the facts of the case. Since yesterday, there have been approximately 2300 views on the Peterson thread, confirming my suspicion that there is some kind of automated monitoring by various news services instead of views by individuals.

These facebook pages that support Scott’s innocence have a total of approximately 6000 followers/members at last count. The number increases daily.

Scott Peterson Case – Truth Be Told
Justice For Scott Peterson
Scott Peterson is Innocent
Scott Peterson Appeal Facebook Page
Scott Peterson – What the Public Never Knew

The A&E docuseries has had a significant effect on the public perception of the case. The docuseries is one of the finalists for the New York Festivals TV & Film Awards.

Scott’s appellate attorneys and investigators completely support his innocence. The direct appeal is fully briefed and could be given 60 days notice for oral arguments before the California Supreme Court at any time. There is one more document that will be filed by the defense for the Habeas petition by August 2018.

There are 15 instances of error listed in the Direct Appeal, including judicial error, prosecutorial misconduct, and violations of constitutional rights.

There are 19 claims in the Habeas Petition, including juror misconduct, the presentation of false testimony by the prosecution, ineffective assistance of counsel, and violations of federal and state law.

Scott Peterson is Innocent.



Your characterization of me as a bully and someone who "Makes things Up" shows how out of touch you are. I have gone beyond your knowledge in this case (which is very lacking), I have contacted primary sources and discussed this case openly, I don't rely on any guilt or innocence site for my opinion. I also am able to understand what evidence is and what it is not, this is something you struggle with on almost every one of your posts. When you post you want to control the nariative, you use this board as an extension of a very opinionated PR site that is more editorial than fact finding, you spam this thread with cut and paste and keep trying t direct people there by posting links here, that is your goal, not to debate the actual merits of the case. Your more concerned about how may "Real People" Read this post which again is very strange when this site is about debate!

The A&E Docuseries was a complete waste of time. It was a PR motivated production that failed to examine the questions it raised, it was one sided, and I hope people do take the time to watch it, anyone who watches it will see it for what it is....

I really don't care what the opinion of Scott's appellet team and investigators is, and neither should you, they are paid to represent their client, the reasonable counter is that the prosecution and all those involved on the government side, feel they have a just conviction as evidence by the response to the appeals and prtition.

the 15 issues on appeal are very standard arguments and not very convincing, blame the Judge, Blame the Lawyers, Claim Unfairness in the process.........None of these arguments, even if (very unlikely) the defendant was harmed, there is nothing that would sway the judge to the opinion that the jury verdict was unjust!

The Habeas has the same issue as the appeal, and some os the arguments cross over, which is a direct violation of procedure. I have listed all of the reasons the Habeas arguments fail (Upthread, you are welcome to look them up as they are a direct rebuttal supported by significantly more evidence.

Your biggest problem is you inability to reason, you take Defense lawyers arguments as fact even when evidentuary support is weak or entirely missing. Lawyers arguning points of law is not evidence, not the opening statements, closing statements or any other arguments made during trial.

Lastly: After 15 years, it should be noted, that even in the very limited times you actually presented portions of your innocence theory, your opinions changed constantly and continue to change whenever you are proven wrong. Conner was frozen and kept in a fridge, Burglars Did it, Satanic Cult did it......and the list goes on, the reason you have to keep flipping is due to your lack of understanding of the case and you lacking abilities to reason for yourself, this is why you keep cutting and pasting other peoples opinions. Your Steadfast in your support of Peterson regardless of the facts of the case, you follow others blindly and shy away from any real discussion. This thread is not your own personal Bullitin Board for Scott's innocence, and the stances in miss-information you post should not go unchallenged!

If you don't like how your treated (victims mentality), question the validity of the board, don't want to take part in any discussion that takes independant thought, once again, you don't need to be here!

Scott Peterson is Guilty of Ghastly crimes against his own wife and unborn child, he has been found guilty by a jury of his peers!

Anon
Half a clue plus half a clue does not equal a whole clue: it equals nothing!
anonshy
 
Posts: 1166
Joined: Fri May 09, 2014 12:54 pm

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby Nick » Mon Feb 12, 2018 9:52 am

A giant can of troll spray is what is needed. They want to control this board for it has facts that prove Scott the killer. Period! As more and more facts are posted. They again, lie and say they are being bullied..etc. They've been doing that for yrs on this thread (go back and read from beginning). It's a silly game they don't seem to get far with. From the time they wake up till the time they slink off to their bed, they are obsessing over truth being posted. It's not normal. Block the spammer who can't handle reality nor the basic facts of this case. She's not adding anything to the discussion anyway. Let her go out in public for once and scream for the evil killer. That won't get her far either. They'd be laughed at. Oh wait, they already are after that A&E deliberate deception. :batshit crazy::
Nick
 
Posts: 513
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2017 5:58 am

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby erasmus44 » Mon Feb 12, 2018 10:14 am

Nick wrote:A giant can of troll spray is what is needed. They want to control this board for it has facts that prove Scott the killer. Period! As more and more facts are posted. They again, lie and say they are being bullied..etc. They've been doing that for yrs on this thread (go back and read from beginning). It's a silly game they don't seem to get far with. From the time they wake up till the time they slink off to their bed, they are obsessing over truth being posted. It's not normal. Block the spammer who can't handle reality nor the basic facts of this case. She's not adding anything to the discussion anyway. Let her go out in public for once and scream for the evil killer. That won't get her far either. They'd be laughed at. Oh wait, they already are after that A&E deliberate deception. :batshit crazy::


You are the one who is trolling. Stick to the facts and if someone misstates the facts explain why they are wrong with reference to the facts. Otherwise, please STFU.
erasmus44
 
Posts: 3178
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2011 12:10 pm

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby Nick » Mon Feb 12, 2018 10:19 am

I seem to recall yrs ago, the main SAP had their own message board. You were not allowed to post facts and if you believed he did it. You were banned. The board died a quick death. Sound familiar?
Nick
 
Posts: 513
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2017 5:58 am

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby geebee2 » Mon Feb 12, 2018 10:24 am

Of the relatively small number of people reading and commenting here, it appears most have made up their minds one way of the other.

"Nick" and "anonshy" make a large number of comments ( which I don't read, they seem to have no value, usually being some kind of ad-hom, so I have them on ignore ).

I guess all this is pretty normal. I remember a similar situation in the David Camm case.

I am not sure why anyone would spend such a huge amount of time arguing for guilt.

What's the point of that? On the odd occasion where I think someone is guilty but they think it's a wrongful conviction, I would say I don't agree [once] and leave it at that.
User avatar
geebee2
 
Posts: 5174
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2011 12:39 pm
Location: Gloucester, United Kingdom

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby anonshy » Mon Feb 12, 2018 10:25 am

Nick wrote:I seem to recall yrs ago, the main SAP had their own message board. You were not allowed to post facts and if you believed he did it. You were banned. The board died a quick death. Sound familiar?


I wont say STFU as I don't propose to be the Forum Police, what I will say, is that you should stick to your arguments about the case, that is the best way to promote the sound of crickets chirping in here.

Anon
Half a clue plus half a clue does not equal a whole clue: it equals nothing!
anonshy
 
Posts: 1166
Joined: Fri May 09, 2014 12:54 pm

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby Nick » Mon Feb 12, 2018 10:26 am

anonshy wrote:
jane wrote:Well, I certainly have been put in my place, and it’s definitely not here. Bruce, I hope you and the bullies will be very happy together. As of now, Nick (AKA Laci’s Voice and Blue Heron), the bully who previously has been banned from this board, is in charge of the Peterson thread. She’s assisted by Anonshy, who is not only a bully but a phony who makes up things as he goes along.

It has become very clear to me that are very few real people who read on this thread and even fewer who have an actual interest in the facts of the case. Since yesterday, there have been approximately 2300 views on the Peterson thread, confirming my suspicion that there is some kind of automated monitoring by various news services instead of views by individuals.

These facebook pages that support Scott’s innocence have a total of approximately 6000 followers/members at last count. The number increases daily.

Scott Peterson Case – Truth Be Told
Justice For Scott Peterson
Scott Peterson is Innocent
Scott Peterson Appeal Facebook Page
Scott Peterson – What the Public Never Knew

The A&E docuseries has had a significant effect on the public perception of the case. The docuseries is one of the finalists for the New York Festivals TV & Film Awards.

Scott’s appellate attorneys and investigators completely support his innocence. The direct appeal is fully briefed and could be given 60 days notice for oral arguments before the California Supreme Court at any time. There is one more document that will be filed by the defense for the Habeas petition by August 2018.

There are 15 instances of error listed in the Direct Appeal, including judicial error, prosecutorial misconduct, and violations of constitutional rights.

There are 19 claims in the Habeas Petition, including juror misconduct, the presentation of false testimony by the prosecution, ineffective assistance of counsel, and violations of federal and state law.

Scott Peterson is Innocent.



Your characterization of me as a bully and someone who "Makes things Up" shows how out of touch you are. I have gone beyond your knowledge in this case (which is very lacking), I have contacted primary sources and discussed this case openly, I don't rely on any guilt or innocence site for my opinion. I also am able to understand what evidence is and what it is not, this is something you struggle with on almost every one of your posts. When you post you want to control the nariative, you use this board as an extension of a very opinionated PR site that is more editorial than fact finding, you spam this thread with cut and paste and keep trying t direct people there by posting links here, that is your goal, not to debate the actual merits of the case. Your more concerned about how may "Real People" Read this post which again is very strange when this site is about debate!

The A&E Docuseries was a complete waste of time. It was a PR motivated production that failed to examine the questions it raised, it was one sided, and I hope people do take the time to watch it, anyone who watches it will see it for what it is....

I really don't care what the opinion of Scott's appellet team and investigators is, and neither should you, they are paid to represent their client, the reasonable counter is that the prosecution and all those involved on the government side, feel they have a just conviction as evidence by the response to the appeals and prtition.

the 15 issues on appeal are very standard arguments and not very convincing, blame the Judge, Blame the Lawyers, Claim Unfairness in the process.........None of these arguments, even if (very unlikely) the defendant was harmed, there is nothing that would sway the judge to the opinion that the jury verdict was unjust!

The Habeas has the same issue as the appeal, and some os the arguments cross over, which is a direct violation of procedure. I have listed all of the reasons the Habeas arguments fail (Upthread, you are welcome to look them up as they are a direct rebuttal supported by significantly more evidence.

Your biggest problem is you inability to reason, you take Defense lawyers arguments as fact even when evidentuary support is weak or entirely missing. Lawyers arguning points of law is not evidence, not the opening statements, closing statements or any other arguments made during trial.

Lastly: After 15 years, it should be noted, that even in the very limited times you actually presented portions of your innocence theory, your opinions changed constantly and continue to change whenever you are proven wrong. Conner was frozen and kept in a fridge, Burglars Did it, Satanic Cult did it......and the list goes on, the reason you have to keep flipping is due to your lack of understanding of the case and you lacking abilities to reason for yourself, this is why you keep cutting and pasting other peoples opinions. Your Steadfast in your support of Peterson regardless of the facts of the case, you follow others blindly and shy away from any real discussion. This thread is not your own personal Bullitin Board for Scott's innocence, and the stances in miss-information you post should not go unchallenged!

If you don't like how your treated (victims mentality), question the validity of the board, don't want to take part in any discussion that takes independant thought, once again, you don't need to be here!

Scott Peterson is Guilty of Ghastly crimes against his own wife and unborn child, he has been found guilty by a jury of his peers!

Anon

Not so, the numbers are not increasing on those sites nor FB pages. That's completely false. Those FB pages are dead. The only thing made up comes from MN. We post facts, tapes, transcripts..etc. Someone needs their head checked if they think the lies & drivel on those sites/fb pages will help Scott in any way. Even the most basic truth about the case is FLAT OUT DENIED. They run off when challenged. FACT!

The rest of her rants are as always white noise in attempt to hide the truth from being posted. :wow:
Nick
 
Posts: 513
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2017 5:58 am

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby Nick » Mon Feb 12, 2018 10:28 am

anonshy wrote:
Nick wrote:I seem to recall yrs ago, the main SAP had their own message board. You were not allowed to post facts and if you believed he did it. You were banned. The board died a quick death. Sound familiar?


I wont say STFU as I don't propose to be the Forum Police, what I will say, is that you should stick to your arguments about the case, that is the best way to promote the sound of crickets chirping in here.

Anon

I have, but just pointing out their old game for those who may not know.

Whatever happened to MGs satanic cult theory? I don't recall him mention on that epic failure on A&E?
Nick
 
Posts: 513
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2017 5:58 am

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby anonshy » Mon Feb 12, 2018 10:40 am

geebee2 wrote:Of the relatively small number of people reading and commenting here, it appears most have made up their minds one way of the other.

"Nick" and "anonshy" make a large number of comments ( which I don't read, they seem to have no value, usually being some kind of ad-hom, so I have them on ignore ).

I guess all this is pretty normal. I remember a similar situation in the David Camm case.

I am not sure why anyone would spend such a huge amount of time arguing for guilt.

What's the point of that? On the odd occasion where I think someone is guilty but they think it's a wrongful conviction, I would say I don't agree [once] and leave it at that.


This is a discussion board, if you want innocense lemon drops and gum drops go to PWC and drink the kool-aid, why dont you head over to PMF and sign up for their fan club.

I discuss the case, plain and simple, if you don't like my posts - dont read them, to say they have no value speaks to your level of comprehension. If you think a wrongful conviction sight should be limited to discussion only about innocence I think you have completely missed the point. Just look at the Amanda Thread and you will see that there was a trend, a progression of fact finding that led to the strongest arguments for innocence in that case, without scrutiny much would have been left undiscovered, but that is because people rolled up their sleeves and went to work, understanding the evidence, the process and filling in the blanks. That is not happening here, I took the time to send Dr. Jeanty an email to find out more about his opinion, I spoke with appelet lawyers and criminal investigators about this case, I did not take the lazy route to reach my opinion by just accepting and using other people's work.

I do agree though, this thread should be closed, it serves very little purpose in light of the way it is being used.

Anon
Half a clue plus half a clue does not equal a whole clue: it equals nothing!
anonshy
 
Posts: 1166
Joined: Fri May 09, 2014 12:54 pm

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby anonshy » Mon Feb 12, 2018 10:52 am

Nick wrote:
anonshy wrote:
Nick wrote:I seem to recall yrs ago, the main SAP had their own message board. You were not allowed to post facts and if you believed he did it. You were banned. The board died a quick death. Sound familiar?


I wont say STFU as I don't propose to be the Forum Police, what I will say, is that you should stick to your arguments about the case, that is the best way to promote the sound of crickets chirping in here.

Anon

I have, but just pointing out their old game for those who may not know.

Whatever happened to MGs satanic cult theory? I don't recall him mention on that epic failure on A&E?


I dont get caught up in personalities, like who is MG's / Janey, or who anyone else is in real life, as I have said before, I consider the post people have made here and don't care for histrionics.

As for the Cult Theory as well as the Burglary theory, give me more information other than 3rd level hersay! For the Satanic cult in particular, if they were performing rituals, why is there no evidence of cutting to laci's body, why is Conner basically intact aside from internal decomposition?

Neither of those 2 theories hold any weigh unless you can use evidence as support! Its all about interpretation, just like the post the other day about Laci's watch supposedly showing up in a pawn shop, how es that even remotely evidence of innocence, unless you can first, prove it happened and then provide proof of how it got there!

Anon
Half a clue plus half a clue does not equal a whole clue: it equals nothing!
anonshy
 
Posts: 1166
Joined: Fri May 09, 2014 12:54 pm

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby Nick » Mon Feb 12, 2018 11:00 am

anonshy wrote:
Nick wrote:
anonshy wrote:
Nick wrote:I seem to recall yrs ago, the main SAP had their own message board. You were not allowed to post facts and if you believed he did it. You were banned. The board died a quick death. Sound familiar?


I wont say STFU as I don't propose to be the Forum Police, what I will say, is that you should stick to your arguments about the case, that is the best way to promote the sound of crickets chirping in here.

Anon

I have, but just pointing out their old game for those who may not know.

Whatever happened to MGs satanic cult theory? I don't recall him mention on that epic failure on A&E?


I dont get caught up in personalities, like who is MG's / Janey, or who anyone else is in real life, as I have said before, I consider the post people have made here and don't care for histrionics.

As for the Cult Theory as well as the Burglary theory, give me more information other than 3rd level hersay! For the Satanic cult in particular, if they were performing rituals, why is there no evidence of cutting to laci's body, why is Conner basically intact aside from internal decomposition?

Neither of those 2 theories hold any weigh unless you can use evidence as support! Its all about interpretation, just like the post the other day about Laci's watch supposedly showing up in a pawn shop, how es that even remotely evidence of innocence, unless you can first, prove it happened and then provide proof of how it got there!

Anon


Agreed. No one has been able to prove Laci was cut, Conner was taken out, kept in a freezer and or a fish tank. It's insanity to even suggest that while never proving that happened at all.

The watch theory was debunked a long time ago. As usual, that was ignored.

:sadno:
Nick
 
Posts: 513
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2017 5:58 am

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby Nick » Mon Feb 12, 2018 11:03 am

George really hasn't participated in this thread as his made up theory of a serial killer who was old, having never been to California did it. No one forces him to come here either. Such assumptions he makes while never even looking at the most basic facts of this case. Zero credibility as par for his course. George should go back to convincing people he's a lawyer and has proven Jodi Arias innocent, it just happened to get lost on his computer. :batshit crazy:: :noway:
Nick
 
Posts: 513
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2017 5:58 am

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby anonshy » Mon Feb 12, 2018 11:06 am

Nick wrote:George really hasn't participated in this thread as his made up theory of a serial killer who was old, having never been to California did it. No one forces him to come here either.


Ah Yes the infamous Edward Edwards, had nearly forgotten about that, in an attempt not to kill the messenger, its still hard no to equate that proposed theory to any post after by the author.

I think the rebuttal on Edwards involvement was due to his known location in 2004 and also his failing health as an old man.

Anon
Half a clue plus half a clue does not equal a whole clue: it equals nothing!
anonshy
 
Posts: 1166
Joined: Fri May 09, 2014 12:54 pm

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby Nick » Mon Feb 12, 2018 6:58 pm

anonshy wrote:
Nick wrote:George really hasn't participated in this thread as his made up theory of a serial killer who was old, having never been to California did it. No one forces him to come here either.


Ah Yes the infamous Edward Edwards, had nearly forgotten about that, in an attempt not to kill the messenger, its still hard no to equate that proposed theory to any post after by the author.

I think the rebuttal on Edwards involvement was due to his known location in 2004 and also his failing health as an old man.

Anon

Hence the Nancy Drew fiction. :lol:
Nick
 
Posts: 513
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2017 5:58 am

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby Nick » Mon Feb 12, 2018 7:03 pm

i don't recall us discussing Scott pretending he had no idea his death sentence was coming on that shame of a show. What a crock! He smirked the whole time, no emotion and did not stand up for himself. His family lied for him and his lawyer had nothing. :wow:
Nick
 
Posts: 513
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2017 5:58 am

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby Nick » Mon Feb 12, 2018 7:27 pm

Scott Peterson Rented a MAILBOX THE DAY
BEFORE LACI DISAPPEARED
August 1, 2003

The Postal Service has turned over to prosecutors an application that Scott filled out in connection with his rental of a private mailbox on
Dec. 23, 2002 according to a source familiar with the application.
The Postal Service application indicates that Peterson, 30, ted the box at Mailboxes Etc., now called The UPS Store, in
The Shops at Lincoln Square shopping center near downtown Modesto.

Store manager Laura Rogers said federal law prevented her from confirming whether
Peterson had rented a box. Anyone who rents a private mailbox must complete a
Postal Service form authorizing the post office to deliver mail through a private agent.
Those forms are forwarded to the Postal Service, which keeps them on file in the event
that postal inspectors ask for them, Modesto Postmaster Don Reddig said.

Someone close to the Peterson family said Scott used the mailbox for correspondence
in connection with his work as a fertilizer salesman for Tradecorp. But the source
who claims to have seen the application said it lists Peterson's name only and his
home address, 523 W. Covena Ave., Modesto, not a business name or address.

However, it was later discovered, that Scott had also filled out a second form
to have all his mail from his business address forwarded to the same P.O. Box.

The source said Peterson's private mailbox came to light Wednesday after
the Postal Service received a notice indicating that Peterson's six-month
contract on the private box had expired. A postal employee looked at the
application and saw that the box had been rented Dec. 23, 2002.

The Postal Service relayed that information to a postal inspector, who
instructed employees to contact prosecutors, the source said.
Nick
 
Posts: 513
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2017 5:58 am

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby Nick » Mon Feb 12, 2018 7:46 pm

anonshy wrote:
jane wrote:Well, I certainly have been put in my place, and it’s definitely not here. Bruce, I hope you and the bullies will be very happy together. As of now, Nick (AKA Laci’s Voice and Blue Heron), the bully who previously has been banned from this board, is in charge of the Peterson thread. She’s assisted by Anonshy, who is not only a bully but a phony who makes up things as he goes along.

It has become very clear to me that are very few real people who read on this thread and even fewer who have an actual interest in the facts of the case. Since yesterday, there have been approximately 2300 views on the Peterson thread, confirming my suspicion that there is some kind of automated monitoring by various news services instead of views by individuals.

These facebook pages that support Scott’s innocence have a total of approximately 6000 followers/members at last count. The number increases daily.

Scott Peterson Case – Truth Be Told
Justice For Scott Peterson
Scott Peterson is Innocent
Scott Peterson Appeal Facebook Page
Scott Peterson – What the Public Never Knew

The A&E docuseries has had a significant effect on the public perception of the case. The docuseries is one of the finalists for the New York Festivals TV & Film Awards.

Scott’s appellate attorneys and investigators completely support his innocence. The direct appeal is fully briefed and could be given 60 days notice for oral arguments before the California Supreme Court at any time. There is one more document that will be filed by the defense for the Habeas petition by August 2018.

There are 15 instances of error listed in the Direct Appeal, including judicial error, prosecutorial misconduct, and violations of constitutional rights.

There are 19 claims in the Habeas Petition, including juror misconduct, the presentation of false testimony by the prosecution, ineffective assistance of counsel, and violations of federal and state law.

Scott Peterson is Innocent.



Your characterization of me as a bully and someone who "Makes things Up" shows how out of touch you are. I have gone beyond your knowledge in this case (which is very lacking), I have contacted primary sources and discussed this case openly, I don't rely on any guilt or innocence site for my opinion. I also am able to understand what evidence is and what it is not, this is something you struggle with on almost every one of your posts. When you post you want to control the nariative, you use this board as an extension of a very opinionated PR site that is more editorial than fact finding, you spam this thread with cut and paste and keep trying t direct people there by posting links here, that is your goal, not to debate the actual merits of the case. Your more concerned about how may "Real People" Read this post which again is very strange when this site is about debate!

The A&E Docuseries was a complete waste of time. It was a PR motivated production that failed to examine the questions it raised, it was one sided, and I hope people do take the time to watch it, anyone who watches it will see it for what it is....

I really don't care what the opinion of Scott's appellet team and investigators is, and neither should you, they are paid to represent their client, the reasonable counter is that the prosecution and all those involved on the government side, feel they have a just conviction as evidence by the response to the appeals and prtition.

the 15 issues on appeal are very standard arguments and not very convincing, blame the Judge, Blame the Lawyers, Claim Unfairness in the process.........None of these arguments, even if (very unlikely) the defendant was harmed, there is nothing that would sway the judge to the opinion that the jury verdict was unjust!

The Habeas has the same issue as the appeal, and some os the arguments cross over, which is a direct violation of procedure. I have listed all of the reasons the Habeas arguments fail (Upthread, you are welcome to look them up as they are a direct rebuttal supported by significantly more evidence.

Your biggest problem is you inability to reason, you take Defense lawyers arguments as fact even when evidentuary support is weak or entirely missing. Lawyers arguning points of law is not evidence, not the opening statements, closing statements or any other arguments made during trial.

Lastly: After 15 years, it should be noted, that even in the very limited times you actually presented portions of your innocence theory, your opinions changed constantly and continue to change whenever you are proven wrong. Conner was frozen and kept in a fridge, Burglars Did it, Satanic Cult did it......and the list goes on, the reason you have to keep flipping is due to your lack of understanding of the case and you lacking abilities to reason for yourself, this is why you keep cutting and pasting other peoples opinions. Your Steadfast in your support of Peterson regardless of the facts of the case, you follow others blindly and shy away from any real discussion. This thread is not your own personal Bullitin Board for Scott's innocence, and the stances in miss-information you post should not go unchallenged!

If you don't like how your treated (victims mentality), question the validity of the board, don't want to take part in any discussion that takes independant thought, once again, you don't need to be here!

Scott Peterson is Guilty of Ghastly crimes against hwn wife and unborn child, he has been found guilty by a jury of his peers!

Anon

While most of the population are against that sham show and the participants who flat out ignore facts and fudged sighting time lines. A waste of time.
Nick
 
Posts: 513
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2017 5:58 am

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby Nick » Mon Feb 12, 2018 7:55 pm

anonshy wrote:
Nick wrote:What did Scott mean by this?

"I didn't do anything to Laci, but I know who did," he told Amber.
"Somebody else is involved but I can't tell you who."


Scott's actions speak louder than his words. No question he killed laci, and his words and actions show his guilt!

$15000.00 + CASH, Brother Drivers License, Mothers Credit Card, Other(s) Cell Phones, Telling Amber "He Lost His Wife", Porn, Selling Car, Turning Nursery into Storage Area, listing House, Telling Amber he was in Paris - All prior to Laci's body being found and this just scratches the surface!

Anon

While his family and SAPs deny all this. Liars like he is.
Nick
 
Posts: 513
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2017 5:58 am

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby Nick » Mon Feb 12, 2018 8:04 pm

anonshy wrote:
jane wrote:The initial source of the "I know who did" story was a leak from the Modesto Police to Ted Rowlands. This story was then repeated by Geraldo, Rita Cosby, Nancy Grace, Jeanine Pirro and various other media people. The story is FAKE. There was no recorded conversation that included these words. Had there been one, it would have been played at the trial. Here's the original story:

Authorities Have Peterson-Frey Phone Conversations

POSTED: 9:02 a.m. PDT May 26, 2003
UPDATED: 9:31 a.m. PDT May 26, 2003

MODESTO, Calif. -- Modesto investigators have recorded phone conversations between Scott Peterson and his former mistress Amber Frey including one in which he told her he knew the identity of his wife's abductor, sources have told Fox News.

Ted Rowlands Monday Report From Modesto

According to a transcript of the call allegedly recorded by the Modesto Police and released by Fox, Frey confronted Peterson about his wife's disappearance and was told by Peterson that he had nothing to do with it.

Amber: "Do I need to be afraid of you?"
Scott: "Absolutely not, I'm not a monster."
Amber: "Did you have anything to do with your wife's disappearance?"
Scott: "No, but I know who did it and I'll tell you later when I see you." ..............
>>>>>>.

These are excerpts from transcripts of recordings that were played in court:
January 6, 2003
PETERSON: Amber, I…I…I had to tell you. I’ve been wanting to tell you. I hope in the future I can tell you everything if you’ll let me. I can never ask you to trust me and I am so sorry that I have…that this has happened and this is happening to you. And that is uh…it’s the truth. And…
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.
February 7, 2003
PETERSON: You know I’m not a monster, Amber.
FREY: I never said you were, Scott.
PETERSON: Thank God, I know. But you know I could never hurt you or her or anyone. You know that don’t you?


His Freudian Slip - Speaking of Laci in Past-Tense is total damnation, it showed what he knew and his actions of selling the car, subscribing to porn all show, Scott new Laci was dead and was never coming back, Something only the murderer knew at that time!

Anon

The other slip was during an interview his phone rang during an interview while his wife was "supposedly" missing. He ignored it. He got up to shut it off.
Nick
 
Posts: 513
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2017 5:58 am

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby Nick » Mon Feb 12, 2018 8:13 pm

Nick wrote:What did Scott mean by this?

"I didn't do anything to Laci, but I know who did," he told Amber.
"Somebody else is involved but I can't tell you who."

This is not fake. FACT! it's on tape! No detective made it up.
Nick
 
Posts: 513
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2017 5:58 am

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby Desert Fox » Tue Feb 13, 2018 12:08 am

Nick wrote:Detectives also gave Scott Peterson another test on the day after Christmas, when they executed a search warrant at his home. Once again, Scott was hesitant to cooperate with the police in ways that might prove his innocence – like taking a polygraph test – but he seemed more concerned with protecting himself. It was more strange behavior from a man who supposedly had nothing to hide.


While I believe that Scott Peterson is almost certainly guilty, the argument of a polygraph does not hold much weight with me.
You can only lose by taking a polygraph.
User avatar
Desert Fox
 
Posts: 2289
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2014 7:50 pm

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby Nick » Tue Feb 13, 2018 6:31 am

Desert Fox wrote:
Nick wrote:Detectives also gave Scott Peterson another test on the day after Christmas, when they executed a search warrant at his home. Once again, Scott was hesitant to cooperate with the police in ways that might prove his innocence – like taking a polygraph test – but he seemed more concerned with protecting himself. It was more strange behavior from a man who supposedly had nothing to hide.


While I believe that Scott Peterson is almost certainly guilty, the argument of a polygraph does not hold much weight with me.
You can only lose by taking a polygraph.


Understand. I believe my point at the time was that he agreed to take one and blew it off. While the person running his appeal fb page said "he took one, but the police hide the information". :noway:

http://abcnews.go.com/2020/video/scott- ... t-49854890
Nick
 
Posts: 513
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2017 5:58 am

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby anonshy » Tue Feb 13, 2018 7:55 am

Desert Fox wrote:
Nick wrote:Detectives also gave Scott Peterson another test on the day after Christmas, when they executed a search warrant at his home. Once again, Scott was hesitant to cooperate with the police in ways that might prove his innocence – like taking a polygraph test – but he seemed more concerned with protecting himself. It was more strange behavior from a man who supposedly had nothing to hide.


While I believe that Scott Peterson is almost certainly guilty, the argument of a polygraph does not hold much weight with me.
You can only lose by taking a polygraph.


Polygraphs are a lose/lose scenerio, if you fail, you are guilty, if you pass you got lucky and beat the machine. If evidence is strong enough against you, they can ignore the polygraph as it is inadmissable in court.

Anon
Half a clue plus half a clue does not equal a whole clue: it equals nothing!
anonshy
 
Posts: 1166
Joined: Fri May 09, 2014 12:54 pm

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby Nick » Tue Feb 13, 2018 8:04 am

anonshy wrote:
Desert Fox wrote:
Nick wrote:Detectives also gave Scott Peterson another test on the day after Christmas, when they executed a search warrant at his home. Once again, Scott was hesitant to cooperate with the police in ways that might prove his innocence – like taking a polygraph test – but he seemed more concerned with protecting himself. It was more strange behavior from a man who supposedly had nothing to hide.


While I believe that Scott Peterson is almost certainly guilty, the argument of a polygraph does not hold much weight with me.
You can only lose by taking a polygraph.


Polygraphs are a lose/lose scenerio, if you fail, you are guilty, if you pass you got lucky and beat the machine. If evidence is strong enough against you, they can ignore the polygraph as it is inadmissable in court.

Anon


Didn't he show up for it, only to stay in the parking lot? He called from there, irrc. One of the detectives found in the parking lot. I seem to remember it that way.
Nick
 
Posts: 513
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2017 5:58 am

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby anonshy » Tue Feb 13, 2018 11:45 am

Nick wrote:
anonshy wrote:
Desert Fox wrote:
Nick wrote:Detectives also gave Scott Peterson another test on the day after Christmas, when they executed a search warrant at his home. Once again, Scott was hesitant to cooperate with the police in ways that might prove his innocence – like taking a polygraph test – but he seemed more concerned with protecting himself. It was more strange behavior from a man who supposedly had nothing to hide.


While I believe that Scott Peterson is almost certainly guilty, the argument of a polygraph does not hold much weight with me.
You can only lose by taking a polygraph.


Polygraphs are a lose/lose scenerio, if you fail, you are guilty, if you pass you got lucky and beat the machine. If evidence is strong enough against you, they can ignore the polygraph as it is inadmissable in court.

Anon


Didn't he show up for it, only to stay in the parking lot? He called from there, irrc. One of the detectives found in the parking lot. I seem to remember it that way.


For me it does not matter, I give ZERO credence to Polygraphs. Peterson taking or not taking a polygraph plays no factor in my opinion of guilt or innocence. If I was ever asked to take one I would refuse on principal - Goes to 5th amendment for me.

Anon
Half a clue plus half a clue does not equal a whole clue: it equals nothing!
anonshy
 
Posts: 1166
Joined: Fri May 09, 2014 12:54 pm

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby anonshy » Tue Feb 13, 2018 11:46 am

Nick wrote:
Nick wrote:What did Scott mean by this?

"I didn't do anything to Laci, but I know who did," he told Amber.
"Somebody else is involved but I can't tell you who."

This is not fake. FACT! it's on tape! No detective made it up.


What is the source? can you link it?

Anon
Half a clue plus half a clue does not equal a whole clue: it equals nothing!
anonshy
 
Posts: 1166
Joined: Fri May 09, 2014 12:54 pm

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby Introspectre » Tue Feb 13, 2018 4:36 pm

Why did SLP not see the Medinas's dolly on the front yard lawn when he went to their house to find out if they had seen Laci or anything out of the ordinary/unusual that day of 12/24/02?

Why did the news reporter, Ted (with his head on a swivel) Rowlands, standing in front of the Medina's house not see a dolly on the their front yard lawn?
Introspectre
 
Posts: 200
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2015 3:46 pm

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby Nick » Tue Feb 13, 2018 7:14 pm

anonshy wrote:
Nick wrote:
Nick wrote:What did Scott mean by this?

"I didn't do anything to Laci, but I know who did," he told Amber.
"Somebody else is involved but I can't tell you who."

This is not fake. FACT! it's on tape! No detective made it up.


What is the source? can you link it?

Anon

Evidence tapes of calls between them. I did link them a few times via findlaci2003.us above.
Nick
 
Posts: 513
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2017 5:58 am

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby Nick » Wed Feb 14, 2018 6:36 am

Introspectre wrote:Why did SLP not see the Medinas's dolly on the front yard lawn when he went to their house to find out if they had seen Laci or anything out of the ordinary/unusual that day of 12/24/02?

Why did the news reporter, Ted (with his head on a swivel) Rowlands, standing in front of the Medina's house not see a dolly on the their front yard lawn?


No idea. Who is claiming there was a dolly on the front lawn?
Nick
 
Posts: 513
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2017 5:58 am

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby anonshy » Wed Feb 14, 2018 9:23 am

Introspectre wrote:Why did SLP not see the Medinas's dolly on the front yard lawn when he went to their house to find out if they had seen Laci or anything out of the ordinary/unusual that day of 12/24/02?

Why did the news reporter, Ted (with his head on a swivel) Rowlands, standing in front of the Medina's house not see a dolly on the their front yard lawn?


The inference being that the date of the burglary come into question?

I don't think you can rely on Scott's statements for any truth as to what he did or didn't see at the Medina's

Anon
Half a clue plus half a clue does not equal a whole clue: it equals nothing!
anonshy
 
Posts: 1166
Joined: Fri May 09, 2014 12:54 pm

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby Introspectre » Wed Feb 14, 2018 4:33 pm

anonshy wrote:
Introspectre wrote:Why did SLP not see the Medinas's dolly on the front yard lawn when he went to their house to find out if they had seen Laci or anything out of the ordinary/unusual that day of 12/24/02?

Why did the news reporter, Ted (with his head on a swivel) Rowlands, standing in front of the Medina's house not see a dolly on the their front yard lawn?


The inference being that the date of the burglary come into question?

I don't think you can rely on Scott's statements for any truth as to what he did or didn't see at the Medina's

Anon


Ted Rowlands on A&E:  "I was standing outside that (Medinas's) house at five in the morning on December 26 and if the burglars were there I would have interviewed them, because there was nobody outside the front of that house."

GERAGOS: And when was that safe rolled out in the front yard? Do you know when, did they tell you that happened?

HICKS: Between 6:30 and 7:00.

When Ted Rowlands says he was there in front of the Medina's at 5 a.m. he sees noone. He does not see the dolly in the front yard lawn, otherwise, he would have at least seen it and would have said so on A&E.

The dolly appears after 7:00 a.m.

Susan Medina testified that a dolly was in the lawn.

Officer Wend testified that he saw the dolly.

GERAGOS: Okay. And you see a dolly in the front yard, correct?

WEND: That's right.

GERAGOS: Where in the front yard was the dolly?

WEND: It was on the front grass.

GERAGOS: Kind of hard to miss?

WEND: Yeah.
Introspectre
 
Posts: 200
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2015 3:46 pm

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby anonshy » Wed Feb 14, 2018 6:34 pm

Introspectre wrote:
anonshy wrote:
Introspectre wrote:Why did SLP not see the Medinas's dolly on the front yard lawn when he went to their house to find out if they had seen Laci or anything out of the ordinary/unusual that day of 12/24/02?

Why did the news reporter, Ted (with his head on a swivel) Rowlands, standing in front of the Medina's house not see a dolly on the their front yard lawn?


The inference being that the date of the burglary come into question?

I don't think you can rely on Scott's statements for any truth as to what he did or didn't see at the Medina's

Anon


Ted Rowlands on A&E:  "I was standing outside that (Medinas's) house at five in the morning on December 26 and if the burglars were there I would have interviewed them, because there was nobody outside the front of that house."

GERAGOS: And when was that safe rolled out in the front yard? Do you know when, did they tell you that happened?

HICKS: Between 6:30 and 7:00.

When Ted Rowlands says he was there in front of the Medina's at 5 a.m. he sees noone. He does not see the dolly in the front yard lawn, otherwise, he would have at least seen it and would have said so on A&E.

The dolly appears after 7:00 a.m.

Susan Medina testified that a dolly was in the lawn.

Officer Wend testified that he saw the dolly.

GERAGOS: Okay. And you see a dolly in the front yard, correct?

WEND: That's right.

GERAGOS: Where in the front yard was the dolly?

WEND: It was on the front grass.

GERAGOS: Kind of hard to miss?

WEND: Yeah.


So what is the inference? The burglary took place on the 23rd?

That lied when he said he saw nothing unusual.

Anon
Half a clue plus half a clue does not equal a whole clue: it equals nothing!
anonshy
 
Posts: 1166
Joined: Fri May 09, 2014 12:54 pm

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby geebee2 » Thu Feb 15, 2018 4:07 pm

You can argue about the sketchy evidence for guilt ad infinitum, what day the burglary was on, was a serial killer involved, was Laci seen after Scott left home, etc.

But what is not in doubt is that the State's case makes no sense, in terms of Scott's behaviour. According to the State:

(1) Scott delayed a long time at the warehouse, while having his wife's body in his truck or boat, after letting the dog loose to make it look like Laci was abducted.
That by itself shows the State's case is unreasonable.

(2) Scott dumped Laci's body in shallow water near an island he visited, then told police where.
That also shows the State's case is unreasonable.

Really you can stop right here, and conclude there is no way he did it, however poor his character, whatever lies he may have told, whatever the 175 witnesses called by the State may have said.
User avatar
geebee2
 
Posts: 5174
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2011 12:39 pm
Location: Gloucester, United Kingdom

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby Introspectre » Fri Feb 16, 2018 11:01 am

anonshy wrote:
Introspectre wrote:
anonshy wrote:
Introspectre wrote:Why did SLP not see the Medinas's dolly on the front yard lawn when he went to their house to find out if they had seen Laci or anything out of the ordinary/unusual that day of 12/24/02?

Why did the news reporter, Ted (with his head on a swivel) Rowlands, standing in front of the Medina's house not see a dolly on the their front yard lawn?


The inference being that the date of the burglary come into question?

I don't think you can rely on Scott's statements for any truth as to what he did or didn't see at the Medina's

Anon


Ted Rowlands on A&E:  "I was standing outside that (Medinas's) house at five in the morning on December 26 and if the burglars were there I would have interviewed them, because there was nobody outside the front of that house."

GERAGOS: And when was that safe rolled out in the front yard? Do you know when, did they tell you that happened?

HICKS: Between 6:30 and 7:00.

When Ted Rowlands says he was there in front of the Medina's at 5 a.m. he sees noone. He does not see the dolly in the front yard lawn, otherwise, he would have at least seen it and would have said so on A&E.

The dolly appears after 7:00 a.m.

Susan Medina testified that a dolly was in the lawn.

Officer Wend testified that he saw the dolly.

GERAGOS: Okay. And you see a dolly in the front yard, correct?

WEND: That's right.

GERAGOS: Where in the front yard was the dolly?

WEND: It was on the front grass.

GERAGOS: Kind of hard to miss?

WEND: Yeah.


So what is the inference? The burglary took place on the 23rd?

That lied when he said he saw nothing unusual.

Anon


The burglary took place on the 26th of December, 2002.

On December 25, 2002, police officers went up and down Covena and neighboring streets walking on the front yards of the houses. They were looking for Laci, any sign(s) of Laci, looking for anything evidentiary. Certainly looking for anything that would be out of place. There is no sighting of a dolly in the Medina's front yard on 12/25/02.
Introspectre
 
Posts: 200
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2015 3:46 pm

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby geebee2 » Fri Feb 16, 2018 12:15 pm

Introspectre

I don't see that this dolly would be anything anyone would necessarily notice as being unusual. Police were looking for a missing woman.

A dolly is hardly something so unusual as to be suspicious or notable ( whereas a burglary in progress, a safe being removed, well that is unusual ).

Diane Jackson actually saw the burglary taking place on the 24th. That settles the matter of the date of he burglary, as far as I am concerned

The burglars should have been asked for alibis for the 24th, and those alibis should have been investigated.
User avatar
geebee2
 
Posts: 5174
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2011 12:39 pm
Location: Gloucester, United Kingdom

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby Introspectre » Fri Feb 16, 2018 12:28 pm

geebee2 wrote:Introspectre

I don't see that this dolly would be anything anyone would necessarily notice as being unusual. Police were looking for a missing woman.

A dolly is hardly something so unusual as to be suspicious or notable ( whereas a burglary in progress, a safe being removed, well that is unusual ).

Diane Jackson actually saw the burglary taking place on the 24th. That settles the matter of the date of he burglary, as far as I am concerned

The burglars should have been asked for alibis for the 24th, and those alibis should have been investigated.


Wrong!
Introspectre
 
Posts: 200
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2015 3:46 pm

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby Introspectre » Fri Feb 16, 2018 4:20 pm

Diane Jackson was on both the A&E and 20/20 shows and on each show describes what she saw as she passed the Medina's house. She never mentioned seeing a safe because she never saw a safe. She saw a van and two men standing in back of a van and one on the lawn whom all they did was look at her weird. She never thought it was a burglary, but it was until a friend told her about a burglary and thought maybe these three men might be the burglars. She never saw a safe and the three dark skinned men, short men were not the burglars. The burglars are two white men, tall men and they had the safe.
Introspectre
 
Posts: 200
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2015 3:46 pm

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby geebee2 » Fri Feb 16, 2018 4:30 pm

Introspectre wrote:Diane Jackson was on both the A&E and 20/20 shows and on each show describes what she saw as she passed the Medina's house. She never mentioned seeing a safe because she never saw a safe. She saw a van and two men standing in back of a van and one on the lawn whom all they did was look at her weird. She never thought it was a burglary, but it was until a friend told her about a burglary and thought maybe these three men might be the burglars. She never saw a safe and the three dark skinned men, short men were not the burglars. The burglars are two white men, tall men and they had the safe.


The ones who were caught with the safe may not have been the ones who removed it.
I think there were more people involved.
What do you think she saw if not the burglary in progress?
User avatar
geebee2
 
Posts: 5174
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2011 12:39 pm
Location: Gloucester, United Kingdom

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby Introspectre » Fri Feb 16, 2018 4:39 pm

geebee2 wrote:
Introspectre wrote:Diane Jackson was on both the A&E and 20/20 shows and on each show describes what she saw as she passed the Medina's house. She never mentioned seeing a safe because she never saw a safe. She saw a van and two men standing in back of a van and one on the lawn whom all they did was look at her weird. She never thought it was a burglary, but it was until a friend told her about a burglary and thought maybe these three men might be the burglars. She never saw a safe and the three dark skinned men, short men were not the burglars. The burglars are two white men, tall men and they had the safe.


The ones who were caught with the safe may not have been the ones who removed it.
I think there were more people involved.
What do you think she saw if not the burglary in progress?


She said that they are just there staring weirdly at her. She just drove past them on her way to her house and that was that.

I do have an idea of what these men were and what they were doing.
Introspectre
 
Posts: 200
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2015 3:46 pm

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby anonshy » Fri Feb 16, 2018 8:38 pm

geebee2 wrote:Introspectre

I don't see that this dolly would be anything anyone would necessarily notice as being unusual. Police were looking for a missing woman.

A dolly is hardly something so unusual as to be suspicious or notable ( whereas a burglary in progress, a safe being removed, well that is unusual ).

Diane Jackson actually saw the burglary taking place on the 24th. That settles the matter of the date of he burglary, as far as I am concerned

The burglars should have been asked for alibis for the 24th, and those alibis should have been investigated.


See how the burglary theory has to grow into a full on conspiracy for it to work!

Anon
Half a clue plus half a clue does not equal a whole clue: it equals nothing!
anonshy
 
Posts: 1166
Joined: Fri May 09, 2014 12:54 pm

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby anonshy » Fri Feb 16, 2018 8:42 pm

Introspectre wrote:Diane Jackson was on both the A&E and 20/20 shows and on each show describes what she saw as she passed the Medina's house. She never mentioned seeing a safe because she never saw a safe. She saw a van and two men standing in back of a van and one on the lawn whom all they did was look at her weird. She never thought it was a burglary, but it was until a friend told her about a burglary and thought maybe these three men might be the burglars. She never saw a safe and the three dark skinned men, short men were not the burglars. The burglars are two white men, tall men and they had the safe.


It was some sort of a service vehicle, the colour and times and everything else surrounding this sighting change constantly to fit multiple narratives. We know that Todd came back for the safe with a small Toyota vechicle his friend borrowed from his mother. We also know that the safe was found on a property associated with Todd and his accomplice.

Anon
Half a clue plus half a clue does not equal a whole clue: it equals nothing!
anonshy
 
Posts: 1166
Joined: Fri May 09, 2014 12:54 pm

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby Nick » Sat Feb 17, 2018 1:04 pm

Introspectre wrote:
geebee2 wrote:Introspectre

I don't see that this dolly would be anything anyone would necessarily notice as being unusual. Police were looking for a missing woman.

A dolly is hardly something so unusual as to be suspicious or notable ( whereas a burglary in progress, a safe being removed, well that is unusual ).

Diane Jackson actually saw the burglary taking place on the 24th. That settles the matter of the date of he burglary, as far as I am concerned

The burglars should have been asked for alibis for the 24th, and those alibis should have been investigated.


Wrong!

While the buglers were cleared as you were right.
Nick
 
Posts: 513
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2017 5:58 am

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby Nick » Sat Feb 17, 2018 1:07 pm

Still no proof of imaginary buglers killing Laci, cutting out Conner, storing them in either a fish tank and/or freezer? Didn't think so.
Nick
 
Posts: 513
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2017 5:58 am

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby Desert Fox » Sat Feb 17, 2018 1:58 pm

I know that people don't want to believe that a husband will kill a wife but it is statistically so much more common than stranger murders to have to accept it as a possibility.

Also, if you look at most stranger murders, very few involve taking the victim with them. Look at Meredeth, for example. If Meredeth was instead found on the road where Amanda and Raff were to go on their trip, I would be far more likely to think that they were involved.
User avatar
Desert Fox
 
Posts: 2289
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2014 7:50 pm

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby geebee2 » Sun Feb 18, 2018 12:30 am

Desert Fox wrote:I know that people don't want to believe that a husband will kill a wife but it is statistically so much more common than stranger murders to have to accept it as a possibility.

Also, if you look at most stranger murders, very few involve taking the victim with them. Look at Meredeth, for example. If Meredeth was instead found on the road where Amanda and Raff were to go on their trip, I would be far more likely to think that they were involved.


Of course at first sight Laci being found near where Scott went fishing makes you think it was Scott that murdered her.
That's why the framing worked. But when you look at the details, the known certain details, they do not add up.
Scott telling police he went to the island, where they say he dumped Laci, in shallow water, weighted down by concrete weights. Doesn't make sense.
Scott delaying at the warehouse, assembling a mortiser, when Laci could be missed any moment.
The lack of evidence that he was abusive to Laci, the lack of a financial or any other sensible motive.
So the truth is different to what you would think at first sight.
People really do get framed, it's not common, it's a matter of being able to spot it when it happens, the little things that do not fit.
In this case, the truth got obscured by media speculation, fuelled by police misinformation.
Very much as in the Amanda Knox case. That's all laid out at the family website: http://www.scottpetersonappeal.org/
User avatar
geebee2
 
Posts: 5174
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2011 12:39 pm
Location: Gloucester, United Kingdom

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby Nick » Sun Feb 18, 2018 3:08 am

Interview with a monster. Geesh, he can't even get himself to cry through all his lies.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R5-FFx1LNMU

Funny how he claims he can't comment on timelines.... That is... aside from the fact that he saw her at 9:30 and the dog was returned at 10:30, I guess!! Lol. This guy is lying thru his teeth. Like if he keeps refusing to talk about himself and keep the focus on the tip line and website, he will be fine! And that is the weakest attempt at crying I have ever seen. Complete sociopath!! And why won't he say when he "confessed the affair to the police"? Cuz he NEVER DID, that's why! Amber did! The questions he won't answer are selective, and they are ALL with regard to himself. Can't comment on the lie detector test, "not appropriate"... haha cuz he REFUSED to to take it, nothing to do with "the investigation"! But the best part is when he abruptly ends the interview after he was finally successful at mustering up a couple tears. Whew, I did it! Great place to wrap! haha He is a special kind of killer. Not just his wife, but his innocent unborn child, as well. Evil!
Nick
 
Posts: 513
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2017 5:58 am

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby Nick » Sun Feb 18, 2018 3:27 am

Catherine Crier "A Deadly Game". She covered the case from the beginning. A great recap for those who did not follow the actual case.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BA84weWqGmQ
Nick
 
Posts: 513
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2017 5:58 am

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby Nick » Sun Feb 18, 2018 8:03 am

Desert Fox wrote:I know that people don't want to believe that a husband will kill a wife but it is statistically so much more common than stranger murders to have to accept it as a possibility.

Also, if you look at most stranger murders, very few involve taking the victim with them. Look at Meredeth, for example. If Meredeth was instead found on the road where Amanda and Raff were to go on their trip, I would be far more likely to think that they were involved.


Every high profile case brings out a few nuts who ignore reality. The cranks are not changing the minds of anyone with a clue nor the court system. :noway:
Nick
 
Posts: 513
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2017 5:58 am

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby Nick » Sun Feb 18, 2018 8:40 am

The SP appeal person is claiming the A&E flopumentary was nominated in the 2018 NY worlds best TV & films. As usual, I always fact check before I believe a word they say.

As usual they made that up.

http://www.newyorkfestivals.com/tvfilm/main.php?p=2,38

No show on A&E was nominated.
Nick
 
Posts: 513
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2017 5:58 am

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby jane » Sun Feb 18, 2018 11:30 am

Saturday, Feb. 10, 2018
New York Festivals competition unveils finalists for World’s Best TV & Films

NEW YORK --
The 2018 finalists have been unveiled for the New York Festivals® International Television & Film Awards honoring the World’s Best TV & Films. NYF’s Grand Jury members from the international broadcast and film industry selected this year’s finalists from entries submitted from 40 countries around the globe.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
All entries submitted to the 2018 TV & Film Awards competition were judged online and screened by New York Festivals Television & Film Awards Grand Jury of 200 plus producers, directors, writers, and other creative media professionals from around the globe. To view all the 2018 Finalists, click here.

https://www.shootonline.com/newsbriefs/ ... rld?page=1

Find the article from Feb 10, 2018. Click the link at the bottom of the article to see all the 2018 finalists. Page down to USA. The Murder of Laci Peterson is a finalist in the category of Legal Issues.


Or just use this link posted previously and page down to USA/Legal Issues:

http://www.newyorkfestivals.com/tvfilm/main.php?p=2,38
jane
 
Posts: 2794
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:32 am

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby Nick » Sun Feb 18, 2018 12:18 pm

anonshy wrote:
geebee2 wrote:
jane wrote:
geebee2 wrote:Published on 12 Jan 2016

Did Edward Wayne Edwards Kill Taresa Halbach and set up Steve Avery?

Edwards, a misguided boy, vowed to be the best criminal ever. He killed scores and scores of people of all ages over a sixty-six-year period, and was never caught (for murder). Included are some of the most famous murder cases in the past century.



Geebee, this doesn't belong on the Scott Peterson thread. I'm sure that all of this is very amusing, but if Cameron is promoting this book as true crime, I think he's making a big mistake. He should put it in a different category -- something like crime fiction. Ed Edwards would make a great cartoon character.


Jane, it certainly does belong here, it's a certainty that Edwards abducted and murdered Laci Peterson. Please keep up!


Don't you know, Edward Edwards killed everybody, get it, EVERYONE!

Anon


:lol: :lol: :lol: The fact they claim it's a "certainty Edwards did it" has me afraid for their neighbors. :batshit crazy::
Nick
 
Posts: 513
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2017 5:58 am

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby Nick » Sun Feb 18, 2018 12:23 pm

anonshy wrote:
lsmith510 wrote:
anonshy wrote:"It is quite reasonable to believe that Laci was abducted by Steve Todd and /or his accomplices to prevent her from reporting the burglary, and that she was held at an unknown location for approximately 10 days when she was then killed and her body was taken to the bay shortly afterward. "

That is completely unlikely and unsupported by any evidence, its a Fantasy - COMPLETELY UNREASONABLE!
Someone who may have looked like Laci? Not Identified as anyone other than Laci - that is your own inference!
You don't have to prove why the bodies did not show up till April? or how or where they were abducted? Really?
2 petty criminals decide to hide their petty crime by committing the worst crime, makes no sense to anyone
Kill the Witness so your not charged with kidnapping?
kill to avoid the Death Penalty?
Todd was caught on previous occasions which never evolved to Murder, history shows he was non-violent!

Jane, you have lost the plot. contention of a burgulary gone wrong and then idiotic motivations leading to murder are just silly. Im going to kidnap you and kill you and put myself in a position to be killed by the state, rather than face the possibility of theft charge, and also do it as a conspiracy of others. This is where you argument completely breaks down.

I hope this is what the Defense/Appellet laywers try to argue, it will be a very short day in court!

Anon


You do get that if the witness is dead you don't have anyone to identify you as the person who committed burglary or kidnapping, right?

Surely you are familiar with the Petit murders? Steven Hayes and Joshua Komisarjevsky were petty criminals when they decided to plan a home invasion, raped multiple female family members and attempted to rob them, then killed the witnesses and set the house on fire. Criminals' crimes OFTEN escalate in severity.

And I don't know why I need to keep saying this, but Steve Todd (and probably the people he was with) was not just a petty burglar....he was a drug addict. He has multiple arrests for possession of methamphetamine. Do you have any idea how someone addicted to a drug like meth and on meth reacts to the thought of being locked up in jail?


I do have an Idea of how this person Todd would act, he had been caught multiple times for theft and it never resulted in charges for kidnapping, Assault or Murder.Even if I buy the Koolaid, why would they not just kill Laci on the spot and leaver her body in the house they were robbing? Out of sight, no one would see, no chance of being pulled over by the police and being found out clean-Cut? Also, if they were known criminals who worked in that area, they would hardly be worried about anonymity, knowing they would likely be questioned for any robbery in that vicinity. They would be more likely to flee than go through some obscure kidnapping/murder plot. All of this of coarse is assuming a near term pregnant woman would go out of her way to confront possible burglars, which at this point is pure fantasy. Why confront anyone, just go home and call the police?

anon


Pure fantasy for sure.

Where are these buglers now? I'm shocked they have not sued the one who made up they killed Laci & Conner.
Nick
 
Posts: 513
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2017 5:58 am

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby Nick » Sun Feb 18, 2018 12:31 pm

Clive Wismayer wrote:
jane wrote:
Desert Fox wrote:In honesty, you really should speak to somebody who is a working diver. They might give you a different perspective.

I also would add that if somebody says they can see the body of the bay where the body probably was from the surface, I have some serious problems. I just walked outside (at work) and looked into the James River. I can see maybe 6 inches to a foot down. There is a breakwater and I can look at the blocks in the water.


A diver would be able to talk about his own experiences and his opinion based on those experiences.

But given the number of bay searches and the number of expert divers and sonar operators involved, it seems very unusual that NOTHING was found--no bodies, no body parts, no concrete anchors anywhere along Scott's fishing route.

The police conducted helicopter searches because they thought they would be able to see a body in the water if it was there.

GERAGOS: Now, the water around Brooks Island at certain times of the day is extremely shallow, isn't it?
CLOWARD: Yes.
GERAGOS: At certain times of the day just knee, knee level?
CLOWARD: It can be, yes.
GERAGOS: You can literally walk out from the island into the water, if you had waders on, and walk a good distance out, can you not?
CLOWARD: In certain areas, yes.
GERAGOS: Okay. And at certain points when the tide is low, it's not much more than three feet all the way from Brooks Island to the shoreline; isn't that correct?
CLOWARD: That I don't know. I couldn't tell you how shallow it gets there.
GERAGOS: It's not, it's not a deep water area during low tide, is it?
CLOWARD: No, it's not.
GERAGOS: It's what is referred to by people there as the shallows, is it not?
CLOWARD: I've never heard it referred to that, but I don't know.
GERAGOS: Okay. One of the reasons that you were hovering with the helicopter over this area is because you thought you would be able to see anything or do a visual check and search by being ten feet above the water, correct?
CLOWARD: Correct. We wanted to check the banks of Brooks Island, which is why we were hovering along the water's edge.

How on earth do you knowthis? Surely, a perfectly reasonable inference is that it is simply not that easy to find something in that large body of water. You should produce evidence if you want to persuade us that there is something revealing here. Note also that the police made no effort to cover anything up and that full details of their searches were disclosed.

As you have been so forthcoming with your Graybill timeline, can you also tell us what inference you draw (if any) from the failure to find the bodies? If it is that they were never in the bay, what conclusions (again, if any) does that lead you to draw about where they were prior to discovery and how they were preserved?


While no proof of their fantasy has ever been provided no matter how many times you ask. They can't and never could. <Cheers>
Nick
 
Posts: 513
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2017 5:58 am

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby Nick » Sun Feb 18, 2018 12:36 pm

Way to go MN (Jane), you posted the same link I did and there is no flopumentary re: Scott Peterson listed. You didn't read the link now did you? No shock there.
Nick
 
Posts: 513
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2017 5:58 am

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby Nick » Sun Feb 18, 2018 1:43 pm

MichaelB wrote:
jane wrote:Here's my review of the Crier book:

A gossipy interpretation of the 30,000 pages of discovery material obtained illegally by Crier. Filled with numerous factual errors and faulty analysis of the facts of the case.

A continuation of Crier's biased coverage which began with her Court TV show "Catherine Crier Live" which was filled with "Exclusives" and guests from the tabloid press. The woman who was once a judge became a media parasite of the worst kind.

Book release was timed for the greatest financial benefit to Crier, one week before Scott's sentencing.
...................


Jane I respect you heaps but you got this one wrong. You need to let it go :) He did it.


Speaking of gossip. There were not numerous factual errors, no faulty analysis. No, CC did not obtain material illegally. The exact opposite of what jane claims. Typical. They even claimed CC should go to jail for daring to write the truth about the killer. :lol:
Nick
 
Posts: 513
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2017 5:58 am

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby jane » Sun Feb 18, 2018 1:44 pm

Nick wrote:Way to go MN (Jane), you posted the same link I did and there is no flopumentary re: Scott Peterson listed. You didn't read the link now did you? No shock there.


Evidently you're too lazy to page down to the USA entries after opening the link.

http://www.newyorkfestivals.com/tvfilm/main.php?p=2,38

Legal Issues / The Murder of Laci Peterson / Left/Right (Production Company)

By the way, "Nick," you certainly are hung up on alternate identities. Actually, I don't have any. I go by my own name. You, on the other hand, never post under your own name. There's good reason for that.
jane
 
Posts: 2794
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:32 am

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby Nick » Sun Feb 18, 2018 2:15 pm

speaking of gossip and pure fantasies!

http://pwc-consulting.blogspot.com/sear ... -results=7

I'm never read such non sense in my life. What is that crank in Kansas on at all times? LOL@SPA team? Team of what? :sadno:
Nick
 
Posts: 513
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2017 5:58 am

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby Nick » Sun Feb 18, 2018 2:23 pm

Speaking of more gossip.. This is total horse manure! Nothing in this thinking is true at all. No they were not abducted, no one tried to give any info that would have exonerated Scott, no information was hidden. No, Scott is not going free.

"There were a number of people who tried to give exculpatory or exonerating evidence for Scott after Laci's abduction. They were ignored by MPD and the prosecutors.
Their information was not only ignored. It was deliberately hidden. It is a long process, but we can hope that the truth will eventually set Scott free."

No wonder no one takes them seriously.
Nick
 
Posts: 513
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2017 5:58 am

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby geebee2 » Sun Feb 18, 2018 4:01 pm

jane wrote:
Nick wrote:Way to go MN (Jane), you posted the same link I did and there is no flopumentary re: Scott Peterson listed. You didn't read the link now did you? No shock there.


Evidently you're too lazy to page down to the USA entries after opening the link.

http://www.newyorkfestivals.com/tvfilm/main.php?p=2,38

Legal Issues / The Murder of Laci Peterson / Left/Right (Production Company)

By the way, "Nick," you certainly are hung up on alternate identities. Actually, I don't have any. I go by my own name. You, on the other hand, never post under your own name. There's good reason for that.


Haha, nice one Jane!
User avatar
geebee2
 
Posts: 5174
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2011 12:39 pm
Location: Gloucester, United Kingdom

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby charlie_wilkes » Sun Feb 18, 2018 8:28 pm

geebee2 wrote:
jane wrote:
Nick wrote:Way to go MN (Jane), you posted the same link I did and there is no flopumentary re: Scott Peterson listed. You didn't read the link now did you? No shock there.


Evidently you're too lazy to page down to the USA entries after opening the link.

http://www.newyorkfestivals.com/tvfilm/main.php?p=2,38

Legal Issues / The Murder of Laci Peterson / Left/Right (Production Company)

By the way, "Nick," you certainly are hung up on alternate identities. Actually, I don't have any. I go by my own name. You, on the other hand, never post under your own name. There's good reason for that.


Haha, nice one Jane!


Hey George! Are you on Twitter? I saw this from Steve Drizin the other day re Avery/Dassey case and of course I thought of you:

You know what pisses me off. When idiots write that Teresa Halbach is still alive. Don't say things that can only bring pain to her family and friends. Don't insult my intelligence. Next, you'll be telling me that Edward Wayne Edwards killed her. Stop it. #theoriesforthetrashheap
User avatar
charlie_wilkes
 
Posts: 2043
Joined: Sun Jun 27, 2010 10:58 am

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby Nick » Mon Feb 19, 2018 4:41 am

charlie_wilkes wrote:
geebee2 wrote:
jane wrote:
Nick wrote:Way to go MN (Jane), you posted the same link I did and there is no flopumentary re: Scott Peterson listed. You didn't read the link now did you? No shock there.


Evidently you're too lazy to page down to the USA entries after opening the link.

http://www.newyorkfestivals.com/tvfilm/main.php?p=2,38

Legal Issues / The Murder of Laci Peterson / Left/Right (Production Company)

By the way, "Nick," you certainly are hung up on alternate identities. Actually, I don't have any. I go by my own name. You, on the other hand, never post under your own name. There's good reason for that.


Haha, nice one Jane!


Hey George! Are you on Twitter? I saw this from Steve Drizin the other day re Avery/Dassey case and of course I thought of you:

You know what pisses me off. When idiots write that Teresa Halbach is still alive. Don't say things that can only bring pain to her family and friends. Don't insult my intelligence. Next, you'll be telling me that Edward Wayne Edwards killed her. Stop it. #theoriesforthetrashheap


They do have a point. George Barwood accuses Edward Wayne Edwards of killing everyone. :batshit crazy:: He's that ignorant to reality. By the way, there is no SAP named Jane Hamilton, when found out they deleted their fake fb page. Who they kidding? :noway:
Nick
 
Posts: 513
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2017 5:58 am

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby Nick » Mon Feb 19, 2018 4:44 am

Next George will claim Ted Bundy did it. :roll eyes:
Nick
 
Posts: 513
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2017 5:58 am

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby Nick » Mon Feb 19, 2018 4:45 am

Oh no, I"m being stalked by a sybil who can't handle the truth. Fun! <Cheers> :lol: :lol:
Nick
 
Posts: 513
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2017 5:58 am

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby Nick » Mon Feb 19, 2018 5:32 am

desmonddog wrote:What a trip down memory lane this thread is. I had no idea that anyone but VOS was still obsessed with Peterson (on his CCADP board). I remember lsmith, Cyndi and Sarah from the fratpack board. Marlene had her Scott Is Innocent board and I had a Scott Is Guilty board that was wild and wooley for a while there.

Some things never change. There were the accusations against the bungling burglars on bicycles who would have had to strap Laci to the handlebars in order to kidnap her, Marlene's claim that Sharon was the victim of "False Memory Syndrome" when her book came out (because it's really not kosher to flat-out call a murder victim's mother a liar), Marlene throwing stuffed Kermits into the bay to do her "experiments" (and having several of them wash up right where Conner's body did), blah blah blah. What a hoot. Scott slipping up and telling one of the neighbors he went golfing.....but he didn't say that, he said "gone fishing" and the neighbor mis-heard him! And of course there was the "everyone has to eat" excuse when Scott made Christmas dinner and served wine as if he didn't have a care in the world. Oh! And he didn't call Amber FROM Laci's vigil because the vigil wasn't officially scheduled to start until about 10 minutes after his call.....even though he was actually there at the field, as was everyone else. So that doesn't count as "calling Amber from Laci's vigil". I'm astounded that the same people are still trying to fit the same square pegs into the same round holes.

Especially interesting are those who do a little googling and then claim to be experts on tides, decomposition, maceration, ocean currents, autopsies, and circumstantial evidence. If they don't agree with one expert, they tout themselves as knowing more than that person. If they agree with a defense expert, they worship him and accept every word he said as Gospel.

A real hoot.

Wow, that's insane! If they brought that up during the A&E flop, they would have really won an award. ::doh::

Didn't MN start out with Ron did it? Then it was Sharon and oh let's not forget Amber who had no idea Scott was married. I do recall someone playing MN like a fiddle as
"IKLP". Who knew how easy it was to play the "player"?
Nick
 
Posts: 513
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2017 5:58 am

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby Nick » Mon Feb 19, 2018 6:02 am

MichaelB wrote:http://www.amazon.com/A-Deadly-Game-ebook/dp/B008XOA5J6/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1379999889&sr=8-1&keywords=catherine+crier

Image

In this #1 New York Times bestseller, Catherine Crier, a former judge and one of television's most popular legal analysts, offers a riveting and authoritative account of one of the most memorable crime dramas of our time: the murder of Laci Peterson at the hands of her husband, Scott, on Christmas Eve 2002. Drawing on extensive interviews with key witnesses and lead investigators, as well as secret evidence files that never made it to trial, Crier traces Scott's bizarre behavior; shares dozens of transcripts of Scott's chilling and incriminating phone conversations; offers accounts of Scott's womanizing from two former mistresses before Amber Frey; and includes scores of never-before-seen police photos, documents, and other evidence.

The result is thoroughly engrossing yet highly disturbing -- an unforgettable portrait of a charming, yet deeply sociopathic, killer.

Whilest Matt Dalton's book of pure fiction was an epic fail.
Nick
 
Posts: 513
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2017 5:58 am

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby Nick » Mon Feb 19, 2018 6:24 am

charlie_wilkes wrote:
geebee2 wrote:
jane wrote:
Nick wrote:Way to go MN (Jane), you posted the same link I did and there is no flopumentary re: Scott Peterson listed. You didn't read the link now did you? No shock there.


Evidently you're too lazy to page down to the USA entries after opening the link.

http://www.newyorkfestivals.com/tvfilm/main.php?p=2,38

Legal Issues / The Murder of Laci Peterson / Left/Right (Production Company)

By the way, "Nick," you certainly are hung up on alternate identities. Actually, I don't have any. I go by my own name. You, on the other hand, never post under your own name. There's good reason for that.


Haha, nice one Jane!


Hey George! Are you on Twitter? I saw this from Steve Drizin the other day re Avery/Dassey case and of course I thought of you:

You know what pisses me off. When idiots write that Teresa Halbach is still alive. Don't say things that can only bring pain to her family and friends. Don't insult my intelligence. Next, you'll be telling me that Edward Wayne Edwards killed her. Stop it. #theoriesforthetrashheap


If you are on twitter. Why would you not just look GB up there? You on fb? This is what is being said about him.

Bill Funderburk "Mr. Barwood is now posting an underage adopted girls private information in some of his groups. Even on his timeline. That's how credible he is. He has been reported countless times."
Nick
 
Posts: 513
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2017 5:58 am

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby Nick » Mon Feb 19, 2018 6:51 am

A sucker born every minute. A player getting played. What are the odds?

https://www.groundreport.com/scott-pete ... -peterson/ (George has still not gotten caught up to the fact that was a hoax played on a hoaxter)

I spat my coffee out.

http://pwc-consulting.blogspot.com/2008 ... s-end.html

Umm, no they have not proven Scott to be factually innocent. It's 2018 and they still have not. No, this has not happened either. "We have already proven Scott did not murder Laci and Conner." :noway:
Nick
 
Posts: 513
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2017 5:58 am

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby Nick » Mon Feb 19, 2018 9:06 am

Love it when George who didn't follow this case at all makes "absolute" claims that only exist in his head. Who are these "many people's minds" that have been changed by nutters who made fools of themselves on A&E? Who knew he could read the minds of many people?

Poppy cock again there George.
Nick
 
Posts: 513
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2017 5:58 am

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby geebee2 » Mon Feb 19, 2018 9:17 am

charlie_wilkes wrote:
geebee2 wrote:
jane wrote:
Nick wrote:Way to go MN (Jane), you posted the same link I did and there is no flopumentary re: Scott Peterson listed. You didn't read the link now did you? No shock there.


Evidently you're too lazy to page down to the USA entries after opening the link.

http://www.newyorkfestivals.com/tvfilm/main.php?p=2,38

Legal Issues / The Murder of Laci Peterson / Left/Right (Production Company)

By the way, "Nick," you certainly are hung up on alternate identities. Actually, I don't have any. I go by my own name. You, on the other hand, never post under your own name. There's good reason for that.


Haha, nice one Jane!


Hey George! Are you on Twitter? I saw this from Steve Drizin the other day re Avery/Dassey case and of course I thought of you:

You know what pisses me off. When idiots write that Teresa Halbach is still alive. Don't say things that can only bring pain to her family and friends. Don't insult my intelligence. Next, you'll be telling me that Edward Wayne Edwards killed her. Stop it. #theoriesforthetrashheap


Yes, I am on twitter, I replied to Steven there.

https://twitter.com/GeorgeBarwood/statu ... 7515108353

I do regard Edwards as a suspect. He evidently wrote the letter saying that Steven Avery never killed Halbach ( his signature was "Winnebago Mental Health Institute" ). He wrote similar taunting notes in many cases where he framed someone. More here : https://www.facebook.com/EdwardWayneEdw ... 4047539530
User avatar
geebee2
 
Posts: 5174
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2011 12:39 pm
Location: Gloucester, United Kingdom

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby Nick » Mon Feb 19, 2018 9:34 am

I hear that they may do another doc on A&E that will directly refute the false claims made by Janey, Marlene & Delusional Dalton. I wouldn't mind being part of that.
Nick
 
Posts: 513
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2017 5:58 am

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby ScifiTom » Mon Feb 19, 2018 11:24 am

Nick wrote:Oh no, I"m being stalked by a sybil who can't handle the truth. Fun! <Cheers> :lol: :lol:


To Nick

Nick I would be very careful of what your saying even I believe you being more of guilt into :facepalm: down of not knowing criminal law even you like to mock the guilt. If you are here for a debate then let focus on that part, not fooling around!!!
TMJ

Anne Hathaway number 1 fan

Free the CIP

Free: Dusty Turner, Norfolk VA
User avatar
ScifiTom
 
Posts: 4798
Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2010 7:58 am
Location: Norfolk Va

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby ScifiTom » Mon Feb 19, 2018 11:30 am

jane wrote:
Nick wrote:Way to go MN (Jane), you posted the same link I did and there is no flopumentary re: Scott Peterson listed. You didn't read the link now did you? No shock there.


Evidently you're too lazy to page down to the USA entries after opening the link.

http://www.newyorkfestivals.com/tvfilm/main.php?p=2,38

Legal Issues / The Murder of Laci Peterson / Left/Right (Production Company)

By the way, "Nick," you certainly are hung up on alternate identities. Actually, I don't have any. I go by my own name. You, on the other hand, never post under your own name. There's good reason for that.


To Jane

Thank you Jane for the information even anyway I believe Nick is posting on his own name as you as well. But I am here to focus on the case not fooling around and Jane your doing a good job, even just ignore Nick even I know the guy is being a guilt of hate of not knowing criminal law, even I can handle him myself. But I am not intend to anyway or what every he does is just plan sick of being a fool with his pants on the ground!!!
TMJ

Anne Hathaway number 1 fan

Free the CIP

Free: Dusty Turner, Norfolk VA
User avatar
ScifiTom
 
Posts: 4798
Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2010 7:58 am
Location: Norfolk Va

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby Nick » Mon Feb 19, 2018 7:33 pm

How come no foreign male fanatics were part of that A&E FLOP?
Nick
 
Posts: 513
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2017 5:58 am

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby Nick » Tue Feb 20, 2018 7:48 am

The whole family is vacuous and duplicitous and devoid of personality or conscience. A genetic defect passed down from the parents.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V4IUK_dbIoY

Whomever voted Janey to speak for the nasty Ps made a big mistake. She's proving to be a major fool with a crush on the killer. She can't debate this case to save her soul. She runs off on twitter. So do the rest of the tiny killer cult. Why?
Nick
 
Posts: 513
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2017 5:58 am

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby anonshy » Wed Feb 21, 2018 8:10 am

jane wrote:Saturday, Feb. 10, 2018
New York Festivals competition unveils finalists for World’s Best TV & Films

NEW YORK --
The 2018 finalists have been unveiled for the New York Festivals® International Television & Film Awards honoring the World’s Best TV & Films. NYF’s Grand Jury members from the international broadcast and film industry selected this year’s finalists from entries submitted from 40 countries around the globe.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
All entries submitted to the 2018 TV & Film Awards competition were judged online and screened by New York Festivals Television & Film Awards Grand Jury of 200 plus producers, directors, writers, and other creative media professionals from around the globe. To view all the 2018 Finalists, click here.

https://www.shootonline.com/newsbriefs/ ... rld?page=1

Find the article from Feb 10, 2018. Click the link at the bottom of the article to see all the 2018 finalists. Page down to USA. The Murder of Laci Peterson is a finalist in the category of Legal Issues.


Or just use this link posted previously and page down to USA/Legal Issues:

http://www.newyorkfestivals.com/tvfilm/main.php?p=2,38


WOW a nomination, stop the press! Awards do not mean a thing, Have you ever looked at some of the films nominated at the Oscar's for best picture? the Docuseries was an abject failure in terms of its purpose. It only presented one side of the argument, it failed to support and explore it's own arguments, outright lied about evidence (ie: it was the same boat). Your desperate need to prop-up this trash shines a spotlight on how weak your own arguments are! The only good part of the series was bringing to light the existence of the SPA group, even the directors/producers could not keep them from looking like NutJobs!

Anon
Half a clue plus half a clue does not equal a whole clue: it equals nothing!
anonshy
 
Posts: 1166
Joined: Fri May 09, 2014 12:54 pm

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby Nick » Wed Feb 21, 2018 8:41 am

Desert Fox wrote:
anonshy wrote:
geebee2 wrote:
Desert Fox wrote:When you add everything together, are there really any plausible suspects other than Scott Peterson?


Yes, a serial killer who left a signed confession, "I killed Laci Peterson", decoded by myself on 23rd March, 2015.

This serial killer had already been identified as the killer in a boook published in 2014, which I guess you have probably not read.

See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Ed ... ial_killer)


I think you are too close to this case to be objective. Your facination with Edwards is just creepy! Besides this so called confession that you so wonderfully uncovered (all by yourself), what evidence is there that Edwards was involved?

Anon


I looked to see if there was any discussion of this and virtually all of it seems to have been started by Geebee


While IKLP was a hoax played upon Scott's #1 fan. At no time did they say they were Edwards anyway. George made that all up by himself.

:wow:
Nick
 
Posts: 513
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2017 5:58 am

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby Nick » Wed Feb 21, 2018 8:41 am

Desert Fox wrote:
anonshy wrote:
geebee2 wrote:
Desert Fox wrote:When you add everything together, are there really any plausible suspects other than Scott Peterson?


Yes, a serial killer who left a signed confession, "I killed Laci Peterson", decoded by myself on 23rd March, 2015.

This serial killer had already been identified as the killer in a boook published in 2014, which I guess you have probably not read.

See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Ed ... ial_killer)


I think you are too close to this case to be objective. Your facination with Edwards is just creepy! Besides this so called confession that you so wonderfully uncovered (all by yourself), what evidence is there that Edwards was involved?

Anon


I looked to see if there was any discussion of this and virtually all of it seems to have been started by Geebee


While IKLP was a hoax played upon Scott's #1 fan. At no time did they say they were Edwards anyway. George made that all up by himself.

:wow:
Nick
 
Posts: 513
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2017 5:58 am

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby Nick » Wed Feb 21, 2018 8:54 am

Zrausch wrote:One thing worth mentioning is this is no longer a death penalty case. The death penalty was ruled unconstitutional in California and there's about 0.0% chance of it ever coming back.
Catch up shall you.
Scott is on death row. Where did you get your stats from? :sadno:
Nick
 
Posts: 513
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2017 5:58 am

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby Nick » Wed Feb 21, 2018 9:03 am

anonshy wrote:
jane wrote:Saturday, Feb. 10, 2018
New York Festivals competition unveils finalists for World’s Best TV & Films

NEW YORK --
The 2018 finalists have been unveiled for the New York Festivals® International Television & Film Awards honoring the World’s Best TV & Films. NYF’s Grand Jury members from the international broadcast and film industry selected this year’s finalists from entries submitted from 40 countries around the globe.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
All entries submitted to the 2018 TV & Film Awards competition were judged online and screened by New York Festivals Television & Film Awards Grand Jury of 200 plus producers, directors, writers, and other creative media professionals from around the globe. To view all the 2018 Finalists, click here.

https://www.shootonline.com/newsbriefs/ ... rld?page=1

Find the article from Feb 10, 2018. Click the link at the bottom of the article to see all the 2018 finalists. Page down to USA. The Murder of Laci Peterson is a finalist in the category of Legal Issues.


Or just use this link posted previously and page down to USA/Legal Issues:

http://www.newyorkfestivals.com/tvfilm/main.php?p=2,38


WOW a nomination, stop the press! Awards do not mean a thing, Have you ever looked at some of the films nominated at the Oscar's for best picture? the Docuseries was an abject failure in terms of its purpose. It only presented one side of the argument, it failed to support and explore it's own arguments, outright lied about evidence (ie: it was the same boat). Your desperate need to prop-up this trash shines a spotlight on how weak your own arguments are! The only good part of the series was bringing to light the existence of the SPA group, even the directors/producers could not keep them from looking like NutJobs!

Anon


I can't find any nomination on the list, but no matter. They probably got the "biggest flop" award. You gave the show way too much credit. I didn't hear the nut jobs saying anything factual. The unhealthy one hobbling was rubbing her giant man hands together only said "they call me crazy". Well, yes, the shoe fits!

What I want to know is why they didn't spew the same non facts they do online? That would have gotten better ratings for sure.

1, Dog evidence is illegal.
2. Dr. Chen lied and was no expert, Only Marlene Newell is.
3. Junk science proved him guilty.
4. Kermit proved Conner did not wash up on shore.
5. Burglers who were cleared did it.
6. Laci & Conner were kept in a fish tank and/or freezer.
7. Everyone else lied except Scott.
8. MPD set Scott up.
9. The whole world conspired against the shit salesman.
10. IKLP did it.

:lol:
Nick
 
Posts: 513
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2017 5:58 am

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby Nick » Wed Feb 21, 2018 11:37 am

anonshy wrote:
jane wrote:
anonshy wrote:Connor's autopsy directly states that the skull had collapsed and the normal measurments could not be made or trusted to any certainty

Laci's autopsy confirmed there was no dialation of the cervix and none of the post delivery changes to the cervix.

Excerpt from Connor's autopsy:
A crown-of-head measurement could not be taking because the head was collapsing. Crown-heel length was 48 centimeters (approximately 19 inches). Based on these measurements, Conner would have reached full-term. The skin was quite soft, in keeping with maceration, an effect on tissue soaking in fluid. No vernix on the body. The bones in the skull were overriding, which happens as the brain liquefies. There was a tear near the right shoulder that exposed skeletal muscle and the structures beneath. The tear extended onto the abdominal wall and portions of the small and large intestines protruded through the tear. There was no scalloping, no curved marks around the edges. Concluded it was simply from tissue falling apart or being pulled apart due to tidal action, it wasn't due to animal feeding. A portion of the colon protruded from the anus. There was a portion of the umbilical cord present, measuring a half centimeter (less than a 1/4 inch), and the edge was ragged, like it fell apart or pulled apart. It was not cut.

Internal Exam: There were no specific changes of either congenital abnormality or disease. The organs, in general, were soft and liquefied, in keeping with decomposition. The spleen and kidney could not be weighed because they were liquefied. There was more liquefaction inside the right side of the chest as opposed to the left because of the tear. The changes were simply the result of decomposition and immersion.

Estimated gestational age: Nine months, based on the crown to heel and the crown to rump measurement. However, the body was soft and decomposing. As tissues decompose, they tend to expand, and expanding tissues can affect the whole body. Peterson left the gestational age determination to Dr. Galloway, an anthropologist.

Testimony from Laci's Autopsy (sealed):
Laci still had her uterus but there was an opening near the top part of it. Her cervix was "intact and closed." This means the unborn child did not emerge from the birth canal but from that opening near the top of the uterus,"
Decomposition of Laci's body was the most likely cause of the opening."The uterus is the last part of a woman's body to decompose, so it would protect the unborn child until the last," "That's why the infant's remains were in better condition than his mother."

Anon


Crown-heel length of 48 centimeters corresponds to 36-37 weeks gestation. Conner Peterson's gestational age on Dec 23 was 32 weeks.


Did you miss the prface that said:
1. The head had collapsed - Crown was compromised - "A crown-of-head measurement could not be taking because the head was collapsing"
2. The body was bloated
3. measurement were not accurate due to the condition of the body (coroner and anthro).

Coroner states: "Based on these measurements, Conner would have reached full-term." That is not from a blinded internet poster, that is from the trial transcript, so forgive me for ignoring your numbers and refering back to the coroner!

Why do you latch onto the one thing that fits your theory and disregard all of the rest.

I think it is time you put it on the line, instead of blundering around trying to poke as many holes in a sound theory, why dont you tell us what you think happened?

LGA / SGA - Look it up!

Here is what I am heraing from you as you fight for Peterson's innocence:

1. Someone other than Peterson killed lacy leaving no traces or witnesses
2. Lacy was kept alive for some time allowing for a live birth
3. Lacy was murdered after the delivery or died during delivery and her body was dumped in the ocean
4. Conner died or was killed sometime after Laci allowing him to reach near full term ,minimum 3 weeks after birth.
5. Conner was frozen and stored and dropped into the ocean days beofre the discovery of his body.

Please fill in the blanks or correct any mistakes I may have made!

Anon


Why didn't they mention their crazy thinking on the A&E flopumentary? :popcorn:
Nick
 
Posts: 513
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2017 5:58 am

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby jane » Thu Feb 22, 2018 6:42 am

GERAGOS: And then did you measure specifically the crown-rump length?
GALLOWAY: No, I did not. We calculated the body length from the right humerus, the tibia, and the femur on -- actually I noticed yesterday there was an error in my stature calculation. The crown-rump length should say crown-heel length.
>>>>>>>>>>
PETERSON (Prelim): Conner was decomposing, in general terms. He weighed 1160 grams. The crown -- again, back to my report now, Your Honor. I'm sorry. The crown-heel length was 48 centimeters. The crown-rump length was 32 centimeters.
***************************
Crown-heel length of 48 centimeters corresponds to 36-37 weeks gestation. Conner Peterson's gestational age on Dec 23 was 33 weeks one day according to the LMP.
jane
 
Posts: 2794
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:32 am

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby Introspectre » Thu Feb 22, 2018 10:53 am

jane wrote:GERAGOS: And then did you measure specifically the crown-rump length?
GALLOWAY: No, I did not. We calculated the body length from the right humerus, the tibia, and the femur on -- actually I noticed yesterday there was an error in my stature calculation. The crown-rump length should say crown-heel length.
>>>>>>>>>>
PETERSON (Prelim): Conner was decomposing, in general terms. He weighed 1160 grams. The crown -- again, back to my report now, Your Honor. I'm sorry. The crown-heel length was 48 centimeters. The crown-rump length was 32 centimeters.
***************************
Crown-heel length of 48 centimeters corresponds to 36-37 weeks gestation. Conner Peterson's gestational age on Dec 23 was 33 weeks one day according to the LMP.


:teach:
Introspectre
 
Posts: 200
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2015 3:46 pm

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby anonshy » Thu Feb 22, 2018 12:58 pm

jane wrote:GERAGOS: And then did you measure specifically the crown-rump length?
GALLOWAY: No, I did not. We calculated the body length from the right humerus, the tibia, and the femur on -- actually I noticed yesterday there was an error in my stature calculation. The crown-rump length should say crown-heel length.
>>>>>>>>>>
PETERSON (Prelim): Conner was decomposing, in general terms. He weighed 1160 grams. The crown -- again, back to my report now, Your Honor. I'm sorry. The crown-heel length was 48 centimeters. The crown-rump length was 32 centimeters.
***************************
Crown-heel length of 48 centimeters corresponds to 36-37 weeks gestation. Conner Peterson's gestational age on Dec 23 was 33 weeks one day according to the LMP.


LMP in this case is based on hearsay evidence. The conception window completely covers off variance in the fetal age. This has been covered time and time again. There is nothing in any testimony in the trial or any subsequent opinions offered by Jeanty (Who I communicated with directly), that precludes Conner being dead on December 23rd. Jeanty himself has been studying the theory of Gestational Velocity and agrees to it's merits: Here are the reasons there is no evidence based on Gestational age that confirms Conner was alive after December 23rd

1 - The Science is not accurate to the precision being applied +/- 7 days for almost every precentile, that is a 14 Day Window
2 - The actual date of conception is more accurate than a guessed at LMP in a normal pregnancy
3 - The Conception window itself varies but on average is 10+ Days, That is an additional 10 Days Variance.
4 - New studies are investigating Fetal Grow Velocity account for vast variation of fetal growth, Jeanty himself confirms Velocity changes exist and are measurable
5 - There is limited information on the effects of salt water and other possible conditions leading to Conner's level of decomposition and the effects on the long bones and calcification in the conditions Conner was exposed to.

All of these factors lead to the reasonable conclusion, as witnessed by the differing expert opinions, that there is no evidence in gestational age that would be an expression of innocence in the Peterson Case. If you consider Jane's post it is easy to understand that you can not get to a specific Week/Day with this science, anyone who express that level of accuracy is lying! Jeanty's Statistical work in this field has led to charts based on precentiles with a great deal of variance from week to week. These charts are readily available up-thread, take the time to look at them and you will see how imprecise this science is!

Anon
Half a clue plus half a clue does not equal a whole clue: it equals nothing!
anonshy
 
Posts: 1166
Joined: Fri May 09, 2014 12:54 pm

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby jane » Thu Feb 22, 2018 2:56 pm

" According to Laci Peterson’s medical records, the last menstrual period was May 6, 2002. (95 RT 17864.) "

http://www.scottpetersonappeal.org/uplo ... habeas.pdf
jane
 
Posts: 2794
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:32 am

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby anonshy » Thu Feb 22, 2018 4:05 pm

jane wrote:" According to Laci Peterson’s medical records, the last menstrual period was May 6, 2002. (95 RT 17864.) "

http://www.scottpetersonappeal.org/uplo ... habeas.pdf


As I stated LMP was an estimation as no one has the ability to know the exact date of conception, We do know that the conception window is a 10+ days of the cycle. Here is some more information about the inaccuracy of LMP:

Key Points
• Comparison of gestational age using ultrasound compared to LMP dating shows
divergence between the two methods, with inaccuracies primarily in LMP dating

• Dependent on study, approximately 15% of medical records are lacking an LMP date

• Detailed study of recorded LMP found that only 32% could be classified as truly certain

• LMP records for pregnant populations are not random, with some numbers (especially 15)
being a preferred date, indicating guesswork in recall of LMP

• The birth weight profile for gestational age based on LMP is also non-random, with
apparent subpopulations; since a normal distribution with no subpopulations would be
expected if all women record true LMP, this indicates systematic bias in recall of LMP

• When LMP was recorded twice for individual women, comparison of the two sets of records
found only 71.1% had the same date

• A study of recall of LMP found only 56% of women were able to remember the exact day

• These findings indicate that there is a great deal of uncertainty in recall of LMP dates

Study Link: https://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=12&ved=0ahUKEwjRvqWAw7rZAhUWiIMKHR2eB5wQFghrMAs&url=http%3A%2F%2Fuk.clearblue.com%2Fsites%2Fdefault%2Ffiles%2FHCP_Publications%2FArticles-Pregnancy%2FAccuracy_of_recollection_of_Last_Menstrual_Period.pdf&usg=AOvVaw3-ACIHBhKQjzsshyKO_ZwW

Anon
Half a clue plus half a clue does not equal a whole clue: it equals nothing!
anonshy
 
Posts: 1166
Joined: Fri May 09, 2014 12:54 pm

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby jane » Thu Feb 22, 2018 6:15 pm

Any woman who is trying to get pregnant knows the exact date of her LMP. From the testimony of Rose Rocha, Brent's wife:

P. HARRIS: Okay. You mentioned that Laci told you that they were trying to get pregnant?
ROCHA: Yes.
P. HARRIS: Okay. And from that did you understand that that there was a problem with her getting pregnant?
ROCHA: I remember her mentioning sometimes, we would talk and she'd say, Oh, we're really going to try this month. I remember her mentioning something about an ovulation calculator where she was going to find the time that she was most fertile so she could be successful in conceiving.
P. HARRIS: And you understand an ovulation calculator to be a device that tells you pretty much, gives you the time that there's most likely, likelihood for pregnancy, correct?
ROCHA: Yes.
P. HARRIS: And it was your understanding from talking to Laci that in order for her to get pregnant Scott had to come home during those time periods that were the most able, she was most able to conceive, correct?
ROCHA: Yes.
P. HARRIS: And that Scott often traveled, you knew that, didn't you?
ROCHA: I knew that he traveled, yes.
P. HARRIS: You knew -- in fact, he set his schedule specifically and made efforts to come home so that in order for her to get pregnant?
ROCHA: She never told me that, no.
P. HARRIS: She told you consistently that they had to make a lot of effort to get pregnant, didn't she?
ROCHA: She would talk about, "Oh, this month we're really going to try. I purchased the ovulation calculator."
P. HARRIS: Okay. And it was --
ROCHA: I believe it was.
P. HARRIS: I'm sorry, excuse me. You knew in fact she had at one point lost an ovary?
ROCHA: Yes, I knew she had something, yeah.
P. HARRIS: And she made it very plain to you that it would require an effort on both their parts for her to get pregnant, didn't she?
ROCHA: Yeah.
jane
 
Posts: 2794
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:32 am

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby anonshy » Thu Feb 22, 2018 8:48 pm

jane wrote:Any woman who is trying to get pregnant knows the exact date of her LMP. From the testimony of Rose Rocha, Brent's wife:

P. HARRIS: Okay. You mentioned that Laci told you that they were trying to get pregnant?
ROCHA: Yes.
P. HARRIS: Okay. And from that did you understand that that there was a problem with her getting pregnant?
ROCHA: I remember her mentioning sometimes, we would talk and she'd say, Oh, we're really going to try this month. I remember her mentioning something about an ovulation calculator where she was going to find the time that she was most fertile so she could be successful in conceiving.
P. HARRIS: And you understand an ovulation calculator to be a device that tells you pretty much, gives you the time that there's most likely, likelihood for pregnancy, correct?
ROCHA: Yes.
P. HARRIS: And it was your understanding from talking to Laci that in order for her to get pregnant Scott had to come home during those time periods that were the most able, she was most able to conceive, correct?
ROCHA: Yes.
P. HARRIS: And that Scott often traveled, you knew that, didn't you?
ROCHA: I knew that he traveled, yes.
P. HARRIS: You knew -- in fact, he set his schedule specifically and made efforts to come home so that in order for her to get pregnant?
ROCHA: She never told me that, no.
P. HARRIS: She told you consistently that they had to make a lot of effort to get pregnant, didn't she?
ROCHA: She would talk about, "Oh, this month we're really going to try. I purchased the ovulation calculator."
P. HARRIS: Okay. And it was --
ROCHA: I believe it was.
P. HARRIS: I'm sorry, excuse me. You knew in fact she had at one point lost an ovary?
ROCHA: Yes, I knew she had something, yeah.
P. HARRIS: And she made it very plain to you that it would require an effort on both their parts for her to get pregnant, didn't she?
ROCHA: Yeah.


Conception window is 10+ days, planning to get pregnant would require inter coarse during this window, so even if you are 100% sure of your LMP (which is not very likely given the statistical analysis in the report I presented). There is still a variance of 10+ day depending on the length of the cycle.

I have given very precise arguments regarding gestational age and its lack of clarity in this case and you respond with Laci's mothers reccolection which does not refute any of the arguments I have put forward. There is no evidence from the trial that Conner was born alive, no evidence Conner ever took a breath, no reasoning to support Conner lived past Dec 23/24. There is no accounting for Conners decomposition in correlation to Laci's, as her body shows no sign of live birth, and her uterus show no signs of being cut. Factor all of this together and it is easy to understand that gestational age in this case is not accurate as to be an expression of innocence. Conners' Bone measurements by Jeanty's own charts, has a variance of almost 3 weeks depending on the percentile, that is hardly accurate, especially considering the lack of any other supporting evidence.

Anon
Half a clue plus half a clue does not equal a whole clue: it equals nothing!
anonshy
 
Posts: 1166
Joined: Fri May 09, 2014 12:54 pm

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby jane » Fri Feb 23, 2018 6:14 am

:roll: :sadno:
jane
 
Posts: 2794
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:32 am

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby Nick » Fri Feb 23, 2018 6:51 am

Introspectre wrote:
jane wrote:GERAGOS: And then did you measure specifically the crown-rump length?
GALLOWAY: No, I did not. We calculated the body length from the right humerus, the tibia, and the femur on -- actually I noticed yesterday there was an error in my stature calculation. The crown-rump length should say crown-heel length.
>>>>>>>>>>
PETERSON (Prelim): Conner was decomposing, in general terms. He weighed 1160 grams. The crown -- again, back to my report now, Your Honor. I'm sorry. The crown-heel length was 48 centimeters. The crown-rump length was 32 centimeters.
***************************
Crown-heel length of 48 centimeters corresponds to 36-37 weeks gestation. Conner Peterson's gestational age on Dec 23 was 33 weeks one day according to the LMP.


:teach:

:facepalm: They still cut & paste from their own junk while never proving Laci & Conner were kept in a fish tank and/or freezer.
Nick
 
Posts: 513
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2017 5:58 am

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby Nick » Fri Feb 23, 2018 6:56 am

anonshy wrote:
jane wrote:Any woman who is trying to get pregnant knows the exact date of her LMP. From the testimony of Rose Rocha, Brent's wife:

P. HARRIS: Okay. You mentioned that Laci told you that they were trying to get pregnant?
ROCHA: Yes.
P. HARRIS: Okay. And from that did you understand that that there was a problem with her getting pregnant?
ROCHA: I remember her mentioning sometimes, we would talk and she'd say, Oh, we're really going to try this month. I remember her mentioning something about an ovulation calculator where she was going to find the time that she was most fertile so she could be successful in conceiving.
P. HARRIS: And you understand an ovulation calculator to be a device that tells you pretty much, gives you the time that there's most likely, likelihood for pregnancy, correct?
ROCHA: Yes.
P. HARRIS: And it was your understanding from talking to Laci that in order for her to get pregnant Scott had to come home during those time periods that were the most able, she was most able to conceive, correct?
ROCHA: Yes.
P. HARRIS: And that Scott often traveled, you knew that, didn't you?
ROCHA: I knew that he traveled, yes.
P. HARRIS: You knew -- in fact, he set his schedule specifically and made efforts to come home so that in order for her to get pregnant?
ROCHA: She never told me that, no.
P. HARRIS: She told you consistently that they had to make a lot of effort to get pregnant, didn't she?
ROCHA: She would talk about, "Oh, this month we're really going to try. I purchased the ovulation calculator."
P. HARRIS: Okay. And it was --
ROCHA: I believe it was.
P. HARRIS: I'm sorry, excuse me. You knew in fact she had at one point lost an ovary?
ROCHA: Yes, I knew she had something, yeah.
P. HARRIS: And she made it very plain to you that it would require an effort on both their parts for her to get pregnant, didn't she?
ROCHA: Yeah.


Conception window is 10+ days, planning to get pregnant would require inter coarse during this window, so even if you are 100% sure of your LMP (which is not very likely given the statistical analysis in the report I presented). There is still a variance of 10+ day depending on the length of the cycle.

I have given very precise arguments regarding gestational age and its lack of clarity in this case and you respond with Laci's mothers reccolection which does not refute any of the arguments I have put forward. There is no evidence from the trial that Conner was born alive, no evidence Conner ever took a breath, no reasoning to support Conner lived past Dec 23/24. There is no accounting for Conners decomposition in correlation to Laci's, as her body shows no sign of live birth, and her uterus show no signs of being cut. Factor all of this together and it is easy to understand that gestational age in this case is not accurate as to be an expression of innocence. Conners' Bone measurements by Jeanty's own charts, has a variance of almost 3 weeks depending on the percentile, that is hardly accurate, especially considering the lack of any other supporting evidence.

Anon

This has been explained to them probably about 500 times in the past 15 yrs. They have stead fast ignored it. Hense more cut & paste of their junk science. ::doh::
Nick
 
Posts: 513
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2017 5:58 am

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby Nick » Fri Feb 23, 2018 7:33 am

Introspectre wrote:
jane wrote:GERAGOS: And then did you measure specifically the crown-rump length?
GALLOWAY: No, I did not. We calculated the body length from the right humerus, the tibia, and the femur on -- actually I noticed yesterday there was an error in my stature calculation. The crown-rump length should say crown-heel length.
>>>>>>>>>>
PETERSON (Prelim): Conner was decomposing, in general terms. He weighed 1160 grams. The crown -- again, back to my report now, Your Honor. I'm sorry. The crown-heel length was 48 centimeters. The crown-rump length was 32 centimeters.
***************************
Crown-heel length of 48 centimeters corresponds to 36-37 weeks gestation. Conner Peterson's gestational age on Dec 23 was 33 weeks one day according to the LMP.


:teach:

There cut & past act is a bit much while they ignore how wrong they have been for 15 yrs. They also have ignored just about every other factor that proved Scott did it. :batshit crazy::
Nick
 
Posts: 513
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2017 5:58 am

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby Nick » Fri Feb 23, 2018 7:43 am

Marlene wrote:
geebee2 wrote:
Bill Williams wrote:
anglolawyer wrote: Another problem with the abduction theory, apart from the improbability that abductors would try to frame Peterson, or leave the foetus/baby with twine round its neck is this: why would they leave the foetus/baby so far from its mother? Surely, the idea is to convince the cops Scott dumped Laci on 24 Dec when she was still pregnant. Why would abductors imagine an outcome in which the two bodies are so widely separated? What was the thinking behind that?

As geebee says, we are all grasping at straws here.

And when there're grasping of straws going on, on both sides, the default verdict then is not-guilty - not because the defence has demonstrated anything, but because the prosecution has failed to demonstrate anything.

In fact, California law is very specific about the process of choice for jurors. If jurors are presented with equally weighted choices, one that tends to convict the other that tends to acquit, they must choose the one that acquits.

There are all sorts of improbablities with the abduction theory(ies). I regard them to have equal veracity (or more) than the prosecution theories. In California there is a double burden on the prosecution, to presnet a case that meets the reaosnable doubt standard AND is more reasonable than the defence theories.

That's double standard has not been met here.


Bill

The evidence presented by the prosecution shows that Laci was dumped in the bay, close to the spot Scott Peterson visited with his boat.

That's hard to explain unless Scott murdered her. Given the other circumstantial evidence (his unfaithfulness,the circumstances of his arrest, and apparently many other pieces of evidence the jurors were shown) I'd say the only chance for the defence is to either find firm evidence that someone else did it, or to somehow show that the prosecution evidence is flawed in some way, in other words that it is incompatible with the prosecution case.

It's not an equal weighted choice, as a juror I'd say (based on the evidence I have seen) it's maybe 95% certain Scott did it.

That means I accept there is some small chance he didn't do it, but that's no use if it cannot be proved somehow.

That's how our criminal system works.


But evidence was produced by the State that put into serious doubt the connection between the fishing trip and the recovery locations. I just posted some of that as a response to another post. Some of that evidence was fraudulently covered up by the State, but I fault the Defense for letting them get away with it as most of it apparently slipped by them, too.

The whole truth was not presented at the trial. My opinion is that the State's theory is not only full of holes, but it was presented in a dishonest, fraudulent way.


Poppy cock at best. There was no cover up by the State. You mean your truth that only exist in your head was not presented? Why didn't Garagos ask you to present your non reality to the stand? For sure you would have freed the killer. :noway: LOL@dishonest and fraudulent.

The sky is falling! :batshit crazy::
Nick
 
Posts: 513
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2017 5:58 am

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby jane » Fri Feb 23, 2018 7:50 am

:roll:
Trolls like Nick and Anonshy generally prefer to post their own false bullcrap instead of acknowledging facts from reputable sources. None of them are the least bit interested in the truth.
jane
 
Posts: 2794
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:32 am

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby ScifiTom » Fri Feb 23, 2018 8:58 am

jane wrote::roll:
Trolls like Nick and Anonshy generally prefer to post their own false bullcrap instead of acknowledging facts from reputable sources. None of them are the least bit interested in the truth.


To Jane

And I 2nd it as well, even I believe Nick & Anon only want to cause trouble. But I always knows that Anon said he wanted a debate even he not going to understand deaf people of how we communicate to speak even I believe Anon is against deaf people even doesn't understood what it means to him, and Nick is just a guy who horse around of not knowing anything into criminal law. I follow the law for a reason and I agree with you Jane and keep up the good work Jane!!!
TMJ

Anne Hathaway number 1 fan

Free the CIP

Free: Dusty Turner, Norfolk VA
User avatar
ScifiTom
 
Posts: 4798
Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2010 7:58 am
Location: Norfolk Va

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby anonshy » Fri Feb 23, 2018 10:42 am

jane wrote::roll:
Trolls like Nick and Anonshy generally prefer to post their own false bullcrap instead of acknowledging facts from reputable sources. None of them are the least bit interested in the truth.


Your cut and paste takes no mental capacity at all, your the biggest troll here!

You cant handle real discussion or anything outside you bubble, I made very strong points you obviously could not refute so you resort to name calling!

I quoted reputable sources including Jeanty. If you think I am wrong, tell me where!

Anon
Half a clue plus half a clue does not equal a whole clue: it equals nothing!
anonshy
 
Posts: 1166
Joined: Fri May 09, 2014 12:54 pm

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby anonshy » Fri Feb 23, 2018 11:17 am

ScifiTom wrote:
jane wrote::roll:
Trolls like Nick and Anonshy generally prefer to post their own false bullcrap instead of acknowledging facts from reputable sources. None of them are the least bit interested in the truth.


To Jane

And I 2nd it as well, even I believe Nick & Anon only want to cause trouble. But I always knows that Anon said he wanted a debate even he not going to understand deaf people of how we communicate to speak even I believe Anon is against deaf people even doesn't understood what it means to him, and Nick is just a guy who horse around of not knowing anything into criminal law. I follow the law for a reason and I agree with you Jane and keep up the good work Jane!!!


Sci-Fi, stop acting like the village idiot, being deaf should not blind you from reality. I don't debate you because you are an incapable! Jane is placing herself in that same category as I don't think she understands anything other than the very basic of concepts!

Anon
Half a clue plus half a clue does not equal a whole clue: it equals nothing!
anonshy
 
Posts: 1166
Joined: Fri May 09, 2014 12:54 pm

Re: Scott Peterson

Postby jane » Fri Feb 23, 2018 12:03 pm

anonshy wrote:
jane wrote::roll:
Trolls like Nick and Anonshy generally prefer to post their own false bullcrap instead of acknowledging facts from reputable sources. None of them are the least bit interested in the truth.


Your cut and paste takes no mental capacity at all, your the biggest troll here!

You cant handle real discussion or anything outside you bubble, I made very strong points you obviously could not refute so you resort to name calling!

I quoted reputable sources including Jeanty. If you think I am wrong, tell me where!

Anon


:roll eyes: Blah, blah, blah,blah, blah.....I've heard enough of your nonsense. Go back to at least page 94 and start reading. I've given you plenty of proof that you don't know what you're talking about. Your "original" thoughts on the case are ridiculous. You and Nick deserve each other.
jane
 
Posts: 2794
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:32 am

PreviousNext

Return to Possible Wrongful Convictions: Member Submissions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests