Assumptions on which Guilt is Based

[attorneywan2be]

I think that much of the 'case' against Scott Peterson was based on assumptions by the media, police and the public. IMO, very little in the way of evidence or proof was offered to support these assumptions.

Here is a place to discuss those assumptions.

[Anne2719]

Scott would be capable of committing homicide even though he is extremely law abiding and has never hit another human.

Scott would be capable of committing homicide even though he is extremely law abiding and has never even received a traffic ticket

Scott would be capable of committing homicide even though everyone who knew him (including the Rochas before the police lied to them) said he couldn't possibly do something like that.

Sounds a lot like John List: http://www.crimelibrary.com/notorious_murders/family/list/1.html

[Anne2719]

Scott's purchase of the boat proves he is guilty because it was too small to land sturgeon even though these can weigh as little as 35 lbs.

Scott's purchase of the boat proves he is guilty although this was the fourth boat Scott had owned in his adult life.

Scott would buy a tiny boat to use to dump the body in a shallow bay instead of renting a cabin cruiser and dumping the body in deep water out of sight of land where it would never be found.

Scott could pick up Laci's body and move it unaided, first to the truck then from the truck into the boat then from the boat into the water. He would not need the help of one to three more people to do this although no proof was ever offered that he (or anyone) could do this.

Scott having an affair when he was married to a pretty woman like Laci proves he would kill her even though Halle Berry's husband also cheated on her.

Scott having an affair when he was married to a pretty woman like Laci proves he would kill her even though Christie Brinkley's husband also cheated on her.

Scott's letting Frey think he was widowed proves he is guilty even though another male lover told Frey that exact thing and that man's wife is still alive.

Scott's lies about being in Paris prove he is guilty even though most men who are dumping a woman will tell some sort of lie to make themselves seem better or to hurt the woman less.

Scott's lies about his sexual relationship mean he is guilty even though when Ted Haggard was accused of an illicit gay relationship he lied about it until he admitted he was lying.

Scott's lies about his sexual relationship mean he is guilty even though when Kobe Bryant was caught he lied about it until the underwear evidence showed he was lying.

Scott's lies about his sexual relationship mean he is guilty even though when Frank Gifford was caught in sexual relationship he lied about it until video tape showed he was lying.

Scott's lies about his sexual relationship mean he is guilty even though when President Bill Clinton was caught in a sexual relationship he lied about it until the blue dress showed he was lying.

Scott's lies about his sexual relationship mean he is guilty even though 100% of married men who commit adultery while lying to the other woman about their marital status by definition tell lies.

Scott's lies about his sexual relationship mean he is guilty even though almost every married man who commits adultery lies about it to his wife, family and friends.

Scott's sexual relationship means he is guilty even though 70% (or more) of married men (and almost as many women) commit adultery.

Scott would decide to start, or to not end, a sexual relationship at the same time he was planning to kill his wife even though he knew it would make him look guilty and even though it actually got him convicted.

Scott would be capable of committing homicide even though everyone who knew him (including the Rochas before the police lied to them) said he couldn't possibly do something like that.

Scott would be capable of committing homicide even though he is extremely law abiding and has never even received a traffic ticket

Scott would be capable of committing homicide even though he is extremely law abiding and has never hit another human.

Purchasing a life insurance policy for Laci means Scott is guilty even though it was she who insisted on the larger amount chosen.

Purchasing a life insurance policy for Laci means Scott is guilty even though it was purchased well before her abduction.

Scott would decide to murder Laci before getting his hands on her inheritance

Scott would decide he didn't want a child after paying for Laci's fertility treatments out of his own pocket.

Scott would decide he didn't want a wife or child after crafting a bedroom for his new son with his own hands.

Scott would decide he didn't want a wife or child after going to extreme lengths to get Laci pregnant including running home and taking Viagra when called for sex.

Scott would decide he didn't want a wife or child after moving to Modesto to be closer to Laci's family.

Scott's purchase of the boat proves he is guilty because it was too small to land sturgeon even though one man caught a very large spearfish in a 7 foot inflatable kayak while way out in the ocean (as shown on TV).

Scott buying a temporary fishing license proves he is guilty although in December that is the only license you can buy and although Scott had a history of purchasing temporary fishing licenses.

Scott could safely dump the body from a tiny boat even though no proof was offered that this was possible to do and no other cases were mentioned where that was successfully done by anyone at any time.

Scott would fail to keep the boat purchase a secret and would store it in his warehouse where Laci would meet him and where others, including the police, could easily see it.

Detective Brocchini deleting from his report the information that the Laci had been seen at Scott's warehouse after he stored the boat there is perfectly normal and no reason to be suspicious of the police even though the information went to Scott's innocence.

The MPD lost the tape in which a criminal admits to another that Laci "walked up on them" as they were robbing the Medina home on the 24th but it is normal for police to lose evidence all the time.

The MPD lost the record sheet regarding the tape in which a criminal admits to another that Laci "walked up on them" as they were robbing the Medina home on the 24th but it is normal for police to lose evidence all the time.

Scott would make weights ahead of time even though there is no record that anyone has ever done this.

One, two, three, even four of these things, okay. But . . .

"Put them all together, they spell M-U-R-D-E-R . . ."

In my opinion.

Just way too many things, added together, that are way too much to be coincidence. IMO.

[Anne2719]

PS -- I think cement blocks would be very easy to find and use, and could be stolen (NOT bought) from a construction site.

[Wearing A Halo]

Scott's lies about his sexual relationship mean he is guilty even though when Kobe Bryant was caught he lied about it until the underwear evidence showed he was lying.

Kobe never lied. It was the other way around. Kate was the one who lied about being raped. Don't go using Kobe in the same realm as DRISP. Kobe is a much better man than DRISP will ever be as a human being.

[Wearing A Halo]

Scott being away at the bay when Laci was abducted is too much of a coincidence so it proves him guilty even though if Scott was home that day Laci could have had him investigate the burglary at the Medina home.

Too bad DRISP wasn't home; then it would have been him who would've been abducted?

[Anne2719]

Laci would vanish along with some diamond earrings which were never found but that was not suspicious.
Ears (possibly wearing earrings?) also not recovered.

[Wearing A Halo]

Laci would leave grass clippings in her tote bag with a book and with a jacket stuffed in there and not hung up but that was not suspicious although she was a very neat housekeeper.

Not again Charlie?

[Wearing A Halo]

Charlie, you are forgetting the odds. Do I have to post the link to your odds?

[Wearing A Halo]

Scott would leave her body sit in the truck or the boat while spending an hour or two on the computer at the warehouse and sending cards and putting together a tool.

Don't you mean a "yeah big" mortiser?

[Wearing A Halo]

Scott would go on the computer in the house for some unknown reason after killing Laci but forget to tell the police about it for some other mysterious reason.

There are plenty of "forgot to tell the police."

[Wearing A Halo]

Scott would go to a bay he had never been to before to dump the body.

DRISP just "winged it."

[Wearing A Halo]

Scott would go to the bay in the middle of the day to dump the body.

No one else was at the same spot DRISP was on the bay, DRISP just got lucky-or unlucky (which ever you want to choose.)

[Wearing A Halo]

The extremely delicate baby would be able to exit from the body with no damage by a mechanism unknown to science.

Conner did have damage.

[Wearing A Halo]

The extremely delicate baby would make it well up the shore past the high tide mark with no damage.

Marlene prove with her Frog experiment that it did make it well up the shore. (You don't believe Marlene?)

[Wearing A Halo]

Both bodies would be found separated and in different locations but within 24 hours of each other.

The separation would defy a frame up.

[Wearing A Halo]

The 32 lb of weights that the prosecutor claimed were used pulled the arms and legs off the body even though it is easy for most adults to lift 8 lb with each arm and each leg at the same time and their limbs won't come off.

Just how much time would most adults be lifting these 8lbs for?

[Anne2719]

The 32 lb of weights that the prosecutor claimed were used pulled the arms and legs off the body even though it is easy for most adults to lift 8 lb with each arm and each leg at the same time and their limbs won't come off.
I think most people lifting those weights don't have massive decomposition going on, do they?

[Wearing A Halo]

The mother's uterus would be 2 or 3 weeks post partum and too small for the baby to have been inside but that is normal in this case although unknown to science.

Not again Charlie?

[Wearing A Halo]

The one hair found in the boat made it all the way on the trip back to the warehouse even though the boat was towed at highway speed for 90 miles with the wind buffeting everything inside the boat.

"the wind buffeting everything inside the boat"

Finally, something you can think about.

[Anne2719]

Somebody please let me know when he's done. I TiVoed "Heroes" and I'm going to watch it. Much more believable. IMO..

[Wearing A Halo]

Finding Laci's body at the bay 2 miles from where Scott was boating 4 months previously proves that he killed her even though as many as 200 million people had full, free and unfettered access to the places the bodies were found and for four months.

None of the 200 million people needed nor wanted the opportunity that DRISP did.

[Wearing A Halo]

Finding Laci's body at the bay 2 miles from where Scott was boating 4 months previously proves that he killed her; even though the bodies were not found by police but by passers by who obviously were much closer both in time and in space to the bodies than Scott ever was shown to be. Thus since those people could get closer so could someone moving the bodies there, but that can be ignored for some unexplained reason.

Yep, the passers by are your planters.

[Anne2719]

Scott must be guilty even though after Frey recorded over 3000 taped calls to him no incriminating statements and no confessions were ever made by him.
Three THOUSAND calls?

How is that you are posting these faster than I can read them?

[Wearing A Halo]

Scott must be guilty even though Laci's cell phone, keys and other personal items were found in the home and not dropped in the park or elsewhere to make it look like an abduction.

That was what Mackenzie was for: "to make it look like an abduction"

[Wearing A Halo]

No one in California would keep a woman captive for more than a day or two although Cameron Hooker kept Colleen Stan captive as his sex slave for 7 years.

Two different cases and no correlation to each other.

[Wearing A Halo]

The jury's conviction of Scott Peterson should end all argument as to his guilt; although juries convicted each of the 200 people now released from death row or prison by the Innocence Project alone.

Where are your DNA Molecules AVOS?

[Anne2719]

At what point have you made too many assumptions?
As I said earlier, a few of the items might be understandable. But "put them all together, they spell M-U-R-D-E-R . . ."

[Wearing A Halo]

At what point have you made too many assumptions?

Again, answering a question with a question. You are dubbed The Avoider.

[Wearing A Halo]

The jury's conviction of Scott Peterson should end all argument as to his guilt; although a jury convicted Scott Hornoff in Warick, Rhode Island, of murdering his girlfriend and the legal system there was very proud of convicting him. He would not be free even today except that the actual killer, Todd Barry, confessed his crime and the prosecutors reluctantly had to let Hornoff go free.

DRISP is not special.

[Anne2719]

Explain how, step by step, WITHOUT making assumptions.
Nope, you've tuckered me right out. I'd love to know where you get YOUR energy.

[Anne2719]

And, by the way, 166 posts in less than two hours really has to be some kind of record.

[Wearing A Halo]

All those 'assumption posts' and you, Charlie, are happy that DRISP is on Death Row.

[Wearing A Halo]

I've been working on this one for a couple of weeks.

You can always look at the current list by going to http://another9912.googlepages.com/home
and clicking on The Assumptions (http://another9912.googlepages.com/theassumptions)

Finally you have come up with your own website-(it is your own?). The number that stood out the most for me was the number 1. The one and only one DRISP.

[accordn2me]

POOF!!!!!!!Did I just materialize out of thin air......or is this thread (a bad dream) real....................?

[JustMyOpinion]

I think that much of the 'case' against Scott Peterson was based on assumptions by the media, police and the public. IMO, very little in the way of evidence or proof was offered to support these assumptions.

Here is a place to discuss those assumptions.

I don't understand the topic of this thread. The evidence against Scott was brought forward at trial, he's been convicted by a jury.

[enlightenme]

And, by the way, 166 posts in less than two hours really has to be some kind of record.

He certainly brings traffic to this board and site, if nothing else!

[enlightenme]

I've been working on this one for a couple of weeks.

You can always look at the current list by going to http://another9912.googlepages.com/home
and clicking on The Assumptions (http://another9912.googlepages.com/theassumptions)


It's about time you did something more for Scott than posting on message boards where only a few hundred people will see your great deductions. Now you can get millions of hits and change the stupid minds of Americans. I mean, after all, everyone knows that "Americans Are Most Likely to Base Truth on Feelings"

:cool:

[attorneywan2be]

Scott would decide he didn't want a wife or child after going to extreme lengths to get Laci pregnant including running home and taking Viagra when called for sex.

From the book "deadly game"

p. 67. She and Scott discussed fertility tests, but before they could pursue the idea, Laci got the news she'd been waiting for: She was pregnant at last. She was overjoyed, and Scott seemed to share her feelings. Laci's mother recalled watching Scott hurry over to feel Laci's stomach when she said the baby was kicking. He seemed as excited as she was. "I assume if he didn't want to have a child, he wouldn't have allowed it to happen," Sharon told investigators.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/cdp/member-reviews/AQZ69PVS25BYN?ie=UTF8&sort_by=MostRecentReview

[frydaddy]

From the book "deadly game"

p. 67. She and Scott discussed fertility tests, but before they could pursue the idea, Laci got the news she'd been waiting for: She was pregnant at last. She was overjoyed, and Scott seemed to share her feelings. Laci's mother recalled watching Scott hurry over to feel Laci's stomach when she said the baby was kicking. He seemed as excited as she was. "I assume if he didn't want to have a child, he wouldn't have allowed it to happen," Sharon told investigators.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/cdp/member-reviews/AQZ69PVS25BYN?ie=UTF8&sort_by=MostRecentReview

Might want to turn the page to 68 and quote the infertility statement. Unless, of course, THAT part was made up or a joke. Oh, the infertility statement IS in testimony - Rose Rocha.

[attorneywan2be]

Might want to turn the page to 68 and quote the infertility statement. Unless, of course, THAT part was made up or a joke. Oh, the infertility statement IS in testimony - Rose Rocha.

I didn't read the book, I just found that part on Amazon website..

Personally, I don't believe the infertility statement..IMO, everything else Scott did concerning the baby says otherwise..

[frydaddy]

I didn't read the book, I just found that part on Amazon website..

Personally, I don't believe the infertility statement..IMO, everything else Scott did concerning the baby says otherwise..

I wouldn't expect you to believe the statement. I'm not sure what Scott did regarding the baby that leads you to believe otherwise, but short of the act that produced Conner...I see nothing that indicates some great desire to have a child. Most of what I saw was indicative of someone reluctantly going along for the ride.

[attorneywan2be]

Scott could pick up Laci's body and move it unaided, first to the truck then from the truck into the boat then from the boat into the water. He would not need the help of one to three more people to do this although no proof was ever offered that he (or anyone) could do this.


He supposedly picked up her body and placed it in the tool box, then he removed it from the toolbox and placed it in the boat..then he supposedly dumped it with weight attached without capsizing the boat...of course Rigor mortis was not given any consideration as they were demonstrating to the jury that a pregnant woman of Laci's size could fit in the toolbox and the boat..and how it was possible for one person to pick up a 150 lbs dead weight was not given any consideration as they were presenting their demonstration...

[attorneywan2be]

I wouldn't expect you to believe the statement. I'm not sure what Scott did regarding the baby that leads you to believe otherwise, but short of the act that produced Conner...I see nothing that indicates some great desire to have a child. Most of what I saw was indicative of someone reluctantly going along for the ride.

What are the things you saw that were indicative of Scott reluctantly going along for the ride?

[JustMyOpinion]

What are the things you saw that were indicative of Scott reluctantly going along for the ride?

In her book, Sharon wrote that when Laci called to inform her she was pregnant, she said, "Scott's not ready, but I am".
Rose Rocha testified when she congratulated Scott on the pregnancy, Scott said: I was kinda hopin for infertility."
Laci's cousin testified that when she told Scott he must be looking forward to games of catch with his son, Scott said "I have friends who can do that".
Amber testified that Scott told her he didn't want children of his own and was considering a vasectomy.
Shawn & Amber testified that Scott told them he had lost his wife ( never mentioned he still had a living, pregnant wife).

There is some evidence that Scott felt ambivalent about the pregnancy, IMO.
It isn't uncommon for expectant parents to feel some ambivalence, in my experience.

[frydaddy]

In her book, Sharon wrote that when Laci called to inform her she was pregnant, she said, "Scott's not ready, but I am".
Rose Rocha testified when she congratulated Scott on the pregnancy, Scott said: I was kinda hopin for infertility."
Laci's cousin testified that when she told Scott he must be looking forward to games of catch with his son, Scott said "I have friends who can do that".
Amber testified that Scott told her he didn't want children of his own and was considering a vasectomy.
Shawn & Amber testified that Scott told them he had lost his wife ( never mentioned he still had a living, pregnant wife).

There is some evidence that Scott felt ambivalent about the pregnancy, IMO.
It isn't uncommon for expectant parents to feel some ambivalence, in my experience.

There are other things in addition to the very issues you mentioned...cheating...self-indulgent spending...leaving Laci alone to mop and prepare brunch when she's had minor health issues...never mentioned Conner much when Laci was missing...etc.

[Otter]

There are other things in addition to the very issues you mentioned...cheating...self-indulgent spending...leaving Laci alone to mop and prepare brunch when she's had minor health issues...never mentioned Conner much when Laci was missing...etc.

He mentioned Conner a bit as you said. In one of the infamous interviews he stated that he couldn't go into the nursery until "the little guy comes home" (paraphrasing). Then we find out that the shrine of a nursery had been turned into a storage room.

Oh, and the taped conversation with JP about giving away the nursery furniture and baby clothes, but then they decided it "wouldn't look good".

Good to "see" you FD!

[frydaddy]

He mentioned Conner a bit as you said. In one of the infamous interviews he stated that he couldn't go into the nursery until "the little guy comes home" (paraphrasing). Then we find out that the shrine of a nursery had been turned into a storage room.

Oh, and the taped conversation with JP about giving away the nursery furniture and baby clothes, but then they decided it "wouldn't look good".

Good to "see" you FD!

Yes indeed, Otter! My recall of ALL the specific incidents is faulty due to my time away from the case. But, as you and JMO pointed out, there's plenty of evidence to suggest that the "infertility" comment was not uncharacteristic of SP. To believe Rose lied under oath...don't know what one would base that on, to be honest!

[JustMyOpinion]

He supposedly picked up her body and placed it in the tool box, then he removed it from the toolbox and placed it in the boat..then he supposedly dumped it with weight attached without capsizing the boat...of course Rigor mortis was not given any consideration as they were demonstrating to the jury that a pregnant woman of Laci's size could fit in the toolbox and the boat..and how it was possible for one person to pick up a 150 lbs dead weight was not given any consideration as they were presenting their demonstration...

How can you possibly claim to know what jurors considered? The ME testified about rigor mortis. ( Defense did not choose to bring their own expert to challenged/dispute the ME's testimony)

[attorneywan2be]

Ann Bird told Grogan that Scott was very excited about being a father

Mark Geragos: You asked specifically, did he seem to have any reservations about being a father? She said not a bit. Not one ounce. He was really excited.
Craig Grogan: That’s correct.

--------------------------

Greg Reed testified that Scott attended Lamaze classes with Laci and that Scott and Laci were both very excited about the baby..and that Scott was very excited and couldn't wait to buy kids' outfits for hunting and fishing

Pat Harris: Okay. During about a one month period, they came to your house on a weekly basis to participate in the Lamaze classes, is that right?
Greg Reed: That's probably about right. About once a week.
Pat Harris: You got a chance to see them interact quite a bit during that, didn't you?
Greg Reed: Yes.
Pat Harris: And your impression, from telling the police, your impression was that they were a very happy couple?
Greg Reed: Yes.
Pat Harris: And, in fact, you told the police Scott treated her very, very well?
Greg Reed: Yes.
Pat Harris: They both, I believe your quote to the police was they were both very excited about the baby coming, is that right?
Greg Reed: That's what it appeared, yes.
Pat Harris: And you were called in an interview you did with the police, excuse me. Let me take that back. Do you recall an incident at one point where you were looking through a catalog called Cabella's catalog?
Greg Reed: Yes, I remember that.
Pat Harris: What is the Cabella's catalog?
188. It's a hunting, fishing, outdoors-type of magazine. And equipment.
Pat Harris: And they actually sell kids' camouflage outfits, is that right?
Greg Reed: In that magazine they were.
Pat Harris: In that particular one?
Greg Reed: Yes.
Pat Harris: During that time you were looking at it, both you and Scott were going through the, the kids' section or the kids' outfits, hunting and fishing, or whatever outfits, and the two of you were talking and laughing about how much you couldn't wait to buy your kids those kind of outfits, is that correct?
Greg Reed: I remember that clearly, that's correct.
Pat Harris: Okay. Scott was very excited about that possibility, wasn't he?
Greg Reed: Yes.

----------------------
Scott built a nursery for Conner in a Nautical theme

Mark Geragos: There's a, there is going, in the picture when it is projected, but as you can see, there's a little life preserver that says "Welcome Aboard. " You've seen that picture and you've seen it when you were inside the nursery?
Sharon Rocha: I didn't notice it in the picture, but I have seen it in the nursery. And I don't see it up there, but if you show it to me again. I didn't look specifically at that.
Mark Geragos: (Showing the witness. )
Sharon Rocha: Yes, I see it.
Mark Geragos: Right over the crib. And fair to say that the theme was a nautical theme that the bedroom was, what you and I were pointing to right here is a life preserver. And then there's the boats that are here, blue paint all the way around in the room; is that correct?
Sharon Rocha: Yes, and the bedding was nautical. That was the theme, nautical.
Mark Geragos: Nautical theme?
Sharon Rocha: Yes, nautical theme.

-------------------------------

Mark Geragos: One thing I found in some of the notes of Detective Grogan, I didn't see them in yours, was that on the 22nd, which would have been Sunday, that he told you he was working on the nursery. Do you remember that?
Doug Mansfield: I believe he did.

--------------------------

Mark Geragos: He told you specifically that he had worked on the nursery later in the afternoon; isn't that correct?
Craig Grogan: Yes.
Mark Geragos: Okay. And then he told you about going to meet Laci at the OB-GYN appointment, correct?
Craig Grogan: That’s correct.
Mark Geragos: He specifically remembered that the heart rate for the baby was a 150 beats per minute, right?
Craig Grogan: Yes, sir.

[attorneywan2be]

How can you possibly claim to know what jurors considered? The ME testified about rigor mortis. ( Defense did not choose to bring their own expert to challenged/dispute the ME's testimony)

As I stated in my post, no consideration was given to Rigor Mortis as they (the prosecution) were demonstrating to the jury ...etc..etc..

I think it is clear that I was referring to the prosecution not giving any consideration to Rigor Mortis when they prepared that demonstration...

[thinkaboutit]

He mentioned Conner a bit as you said. In one of the infamous interviews he stated that he couldn't go into the nursery until "the little guy comes home" (paraphrasing). Then we find out that the shrine of a nursery had been turned into a storage room.

Oh, and the taped conversation with JP about giving away the nursery furniture and baby clothes, but then they decided it "wouldn't look good".

Good to "see" you FD!

Hi Otter? Is there a transcript of this conversation somewhere - I'd like to read it??

[JustMyOpinion]

As I stated in my post, no consideration was given to Rigor Mortis as they (the prosecution) were demonstrating to the jury ...etc..etc..

I think it is clear that I was referring to the prosecution not giving any consideration to Rigor Mortis when they prepared that demonstration...


THe prosecution wasn't demonstrating rigor mortis. They were demonstrating that a pregnant woman approx Laci's size could fit into the tool box, & the boat. The prosecution elicited testimony from the ME on rigor mortis.

[attorneywan2be]

THe prosecution wasn't demonstrating rigor mortis. They were demonstrating that a pregnant woman approx Laci's size could fit into the tool box, & the boat. The prosecution elicited testimony from the ME on rigor mortis.

Come on JustmyOpinion, the prosecution was demonstrating to the jury that Scott could have placed Laci's body in the toolbox and the boat..however, they didn't give any consideration to Rigor Mortis which would have made it very difficult if not impossible for Scott to have done what they were proposing he did according to that demonstration..IMO, that demonstration is deceiving to say the least...

[JustMyOpinion]

[QUOTE=attorneywan2be;8849716]Come on JustmyOpinion, the prosecution was demonstrating to the jury that Scott could have placed Laci's body in the toolbox and the boat..QUOTE]

I disagree. They prosecution did not have a man approx Scott's size demonstrate/ place a pregnant woman in the toolbox or boat. They showed photographs of a pregnant woman lying inside the toolbox & inside areas of the boat. ( demonstrating Laci could fit into these places)

[attorneywan2be]

I disagree. They prosecution did not have a man approx Scott's size demonstrate/ place a pregnant woman in the toolbox or boat. They showed photographs of a pregnant woman lying inside the toolbox & inside areas of the boat. ( demonstrating Laci could fit into these places)

I disagree, they were demonstrating that Laci's body could fit in a toolbox using a live person to demonstrate that..obviously, Laci's body was not going to transport itself and place itself in the toolbox..so they were basically telling the jury that Scott could have placed Laci's body there...never mind, how possible it would be for one person to carry a 150 lbs dead weight..never mind how possible it would be for a person to be able to fit a dead body with Rigor Mortis set in into the toolbox..

To me, that's misleading loud and clear..

[JustMyOpinion]

I disagree, they were demonstrating that Laci's body could fit in a toolbox using a live person to demonstrate that..obviously, Laci's body was not going to transport itself and place itself in the toolbox..so they were basically telling the jury that Scott could have placed Laci's body there...never mind, how possible it would be for one person to carry a 150 lbs dead weight..never mind how possible it would be for a person to be able to fit a dead body with Rigor Mortis set in into the toolbox..

To me, that's misleading loud and clear..

They demonstrated Laci could fit. They elicited testimony from the ME that a man could "break" rigor mortis.( Geragos did not bring an expert to challenge/dispute this). The jury could have taken the demonstrative evidence, the ME's testimony and concluded that it was possible for Laci's dead body to rest inside the toolbox or the boat..IMO.

[thinkaboutit]

They demonstrated Laci could fit. They elicited testimony from the ME that a man could "break" rigor mortis.( Geragos did not bring an expert to challenge/dispute this). The jury could have taken the demonstrative evidence, the ME's testimony and concluded that it was possible for Laci's dead body to rest inside the toolbox or the boat..IMO.

I have a question....do you think that it was possible for Scott to have put Laci in the toolbox? And if so - at what point - at the house, where he had no garage - in broad daylight - or at the warehouse - where the truck could not be driven into - in broad daylight? Was she wrapped in a tarp? Would the extra volume added - with her wrapped in the tarp - have fit into the toolbox? Probably not. If so - how did he break rigor mortis - while she was wrapped in the tarp - I would think that would be considerably more difficult?

[Anne2719]

He certainly brings traffic to this board and site, if nothing else!
More like gridlock.

[JustMyOpinion]

I have a question....do you think that it was possible for Scott to have put Laci in the toolbox? And if so - at what point - at the house, where he had no garage - in broad daylight - or at the warehouse - where the truck could not be driven into - in broad daylight? Was she wrapped in a tarp? Would the extra volume added - with her wrapped in the tarp - have fit into the toolbox? Probably not. If so - how did he break rigor mortis - while she was wrapped in the tarp - I would think that would be considerably more difficult?

A body could fit into the toolbox ( as was demonstrated), but I personally doubt he put her in there. As for breaking rigor mortis, the ME testified about the 2 hour rule before it sets in, also testified it could be broken. I don't think rigor mortis is an issue insofar as transport in truck/transport in boat. JMO

[thinkaboutit]

Come on JustmyOpinion, the prosecution was demonstrating to the jury that Scott could have placed Laci's body in the toolbox and the boat..however, they didn't give any consideration to Rigor Mortis which would have made it very difficult if not impossible for Scott to have done what they were proposing he did according to that demonstration..IMO, that demonstration is deceiving to say the least...

I agree AW - (IMO) that's what they were demonstrating. If they weren't suggesting that Scott could have transported Laci's body in the toolbox - then I guess the only other alternative is that they were suggesting Laci could have typically rode in the toolbox when she and Scott went anywhere together in the truck? I agree that the demonstration was deceiving - for the reason you stated - rigor mortis - and the reasons I stated. If they were going to accurately depict what could have possibly happened - then the woman in the toolbox should have been stiff and wrapped in a tarp. In my opinion - it would not have fit. Unless of course - like I implied earlier - Scott moved her body - unwrapped - in broad daylight.

[Wudge]

I disagree, they were demonstrating that Laci's body could fit in a toolbox using a live person to demonstrate that..obviously, Laci's body was not going to transport itself and place itself in the toolbox..so they were basically telling the jury that Scott could have placed Laci's body there...never mind, how possible it would be for one person to carry a 150 lbs dead weight..never mind how possible it would be for a person to be able to fit a dead body with Rigor Mortis set in into the toolbox..

To me, that's misleading loud and clear..


There is no evidence that Laci was murdered in the home. There is no evidence that she was in the truck or the toolbox.

Like this entire case, that too would require speculation.

That she was murdered by Scott.

That she was transported by Scott.

That she was weighted down.

That she was weighted down by Scott with homemade anchors.

To find that any of the above had been legally (proof beyond a reasonable doubt) proven to be true would require rampant speculation and/or fallacious logic, nothing better.

[thinkaboutit]

Scott would decide he didn't want a child after paying for Laci's fertility treatments out of his own pocket.

From the book "deadly game"

p. 67. She and Scott discussed fertility tests, but before they could pursue the idea, Laci got the news she'd been waiting for: She was pregnant at last. She was overjoyed, and Scott seemed to share her feelings. Laci's mother recalled watching Scott hurry over to feel Laci's stomach when she said the baby was kicking. He seemed as excited as she was. "I assume if he didn't want to have a child, he wouldn't have allowed it to happen," Sharon told investigators.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/cdp/member-reviews/AQZ69PVS25BYN?ie=UTF8&sort_by=MostRecentReview

I think this negates the above assumption.

[thinkaboutit]

Scott having an affair when he was married to a pretty woman like Laci proves he would kill her even though Christie Brinkley's husband also cheated on her.

Scott having an affair when he was married to a pretty woman like Laci proves he would kill her even though Halle Berry's husband also cheated on her.

JJ - it's almost as if you are suggesting that because Laci was pretty like Halle Berry and Christie Brinkley - and their husbands cheated on them and didn't kill them - then that is support that Scott didn't kill Laci. Sorry - but I just don't find any validity to these statements. It's just like the argument that because so and so had an affair and murdered his wife - then Scott must have - which obviously, I don't agree with either.

[Anne2719]

There is no evidence that Laci was murdered in the home. There is no evidence that she was in the truck or the toolbox.

Like this entire case, that too would require speculation.

That she was murdered by Scott.

That she was transported by Scott.

That she was weighted down.

That she was weighted down by Scott with homemade anchors.

To find that any of the above had been legally (proof beyond a reasonable doubt) proven to be true would require rampant speculation and/or fallacious logic, nothing better.
And yet, the circumstantial evidence did point to him beyond a reasonable doubt, according to the jury.

An old boyfriend of mine used to be a Legal Aid attorney in Manhattan. He told me that the only cases he ever won were circumstantial evidence cases, since the juries generally didn't understand the concept. He pretty much expected Scott Peterson to be found not guilty for this reason, even though he thought he was guilty.

[thinkaboutit]

Even though experience shows that 350 lb of weight would be needed to keep the body down and this much would overload and sink his boat in this case it wouldn't for reasons unknown.


I have to disagree with this. Put twenty pounds of weight on anyone - especially a dead person - and initially, they're going to sink. That is...until the gases build up in their body.

[Wudge]

And yet, the circumstantial evidence did point to him beyond a reasonable doubt, according to the jury.

An old boyfriend of mine used to be a Legal Aid attorney in Manhattan. He told me that the only cases he ever won were circumstantial evidence cases, since the juries generally didn't understand the concept. He pretty much expected Scott Peterson to be found not guilty for this reason, even though he thought he was guilty.


Correct. As we have been through many times, there is insufficient evidence to support the verdicts.

Thus, the jury necessarily either concluded fallaciously or impermissably speculated. Knowingly or unknowingly, each juror contributed to the wrongful verdict.

[Anne2719]

Correct. As we have been through many times, there is insufficient evidence to support the verdicts.

Thus, the jury necessarily either concluded fallaciously or impermissably speculated. Knowingly or unknowingly, each juror contributed to the wrongful verdict.
IN YOUR OPINION.

My opinion is that there was sufficient circumstantial evidence to support the verdicts. You can keep saying this until you're blue in the face, and it's not going to change the circumstantial evidence.

[Wudge]

This is your opinion, correct?

Fact, as just established, yet again, on the Common Grounds thread.

[Wudge]

IN YOUR OPINION.

My opinion is that there was sufficient circumstantial evidence to support the verdicts. You can keep saying this until you're blue in the face, and it's not going to change the circumstantial evidence.

I'm not attempting to change the circumstantial evidence. It is what it is. And neither you nor anyone else have yet cited the necessary inculpatory evidence that, too, was required to be proven true beyond a reasonable doubt.

[attorneywan2be]

I have to disagree with this. Put twenty pounds of weight on anyone - especially a dead person - and initially, they're going to sink. That is...until the gases build up in their body.


From a Daily News article by Richard Cole

First, said Stephens, the 30 pounds of weights police believe Scott Peterson put on his wife's 153-pound corpse would not have sunk the body.

"Stephens told me in his opinion that 30 pounds would not likely be enough to cause a female of that weight, especially wrapped in plastic causing additional buoyancy from air trapped in the plastic, to go immediately to the bottom," Grogan wrote after his interview with the medical examiner.

"Stephens said he had cases previously where bodies had bloated with decomposition and pulled as much as 80 pounds of weight up with the body surfacing in the bay," the detective wrote.

[thinkaboutit]

Okay - well Jim Jones didn't specify that the body would be wrapped in plastic - and he said it would have taken 350 pounds to keep her down. That's just seems like a bit much to me. JJ - do you have something to support the 350 number?

[Anne2719]

Is this 30-pound figure based on the one cement anchor they can prove he made, going on the assumption that no other weights were used? That makes no sense. I'm sure there were at least five weights. My opinion, of course.

[thinkaboutit]

Is this 30-pound figure based on the one cement anchor they can prove he made, going on the assumption that no other weights were used? That makes no sense. I'm sure there were at least five weights. My opinion, of course.

No Anne - I think that the anchor they found in Scott's boat weighed approx. 6 pounds - so I think they were figuring 6 X 5 = 30

[Anne2719]

No Anne - I think that the anchor they found in Scott's boat weighed approx. 6 pounds - so I think they were figuring 6 X 5 = 30
Ahhhh!

Seems to me the prosecution should've come up with a much better theory than that!

[JustMyOpinion]

Ahhhh!

Seems to me the prosecution should've come up with a much better theory than that!

In an interview 10 days after reporting Laci missing, Scott told Grogan he purchased "something like" 60-90 lbs of concrete at Home Depot. During the time Laci was missing, Scott gave varying & shifting accounts of what he had done with the remainder of the concrete. (i.e. Grogan testified he said he took it home & threw it in the trash, Scott told media he used it around the pool, Scott told Brent Rocha he used it on his driveway..) The concrete anchor found in the boat weighed 8 lbs. A photo was brought into evidence showing five, circular,concrete residue imprints on the trailer at the warehouse. Petrographer ( O'Neill) testified that debris in a water pitcher found in the warehouse was used to mix or mold a concrete object other than the anchor found in the boat, and that chunks of concrete collected from the driveway were not consistent with the anchor because of large rock fragments. IIRC.

[JustMyOpinion]

From a Daily News article by Richard Cole

Who is Stephens? Did he testify at trial?

[attorneywan2be]

Who is Stephens? Did he testify at trial?

According to the article, that was from a police report..Grogan interviewed Dr. Stephens and those were Grogan's notes...

[Wudge]

No Anne - I think that the anchor they found in Scott's boat weighed approx. 6 pounds - so I think they were figuring 6 X 5 = 30



The alleged submerging presents a classical exercise in establishing whether proof beyond a reasonable doubt had been established for any aspect of the alleged submerging or whether the alleged submergiung and all attendant aspects of the alleged submerging are but gross conjecture.


Jury Instruction 38 States

"Each fact which is essential to complete a set of circumstances necessary to establish the defendant's guilt must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt. In other words, before an inference essential to establish guilt may be found to have been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, each fact or circumstance on which the inference necessarily rests must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt."

Given jury instruction 38, key questions follow. (Hint: In attempting to answer the following questions, watch for the fallacy of "begging the question", i.e., assuming that that you wish to prove.)

What do we "know" about the alleged submerging?

What is the source of those known facts?

Is there any evidence that fights hard against the theory of an alleged submerging?

When did the alleged submeging take place and what proves it took place on that date?

How many weights were proved to have been used in the alleged submerging of Laci's body? What is the source of that proof?

What evidence proved what the alleged weights were? (Again, watch out for "begging the question".)

What proved exactly what was used to attach the alleged weights to Laci's body?

How many of Laci's appendages were proved to have had alleged weights attached to them? What appendages had weights attached to them? What is the source of that proof?

What was the total weight of these alleged weights? What is the source of that proof?

What evidence proved the total weight of the alleged weights would have been sufficient to keep Laci submerged on the bottom of the bay?

[Proved means: Proof beyond a reasonable doubt.]

[cookiewench]

I don't understand how Scott could have used cement around the pool or driveway in December. Who does projects like that in December - even in Modesto?

As for him throwing it out - that's not believable, either. Who throws out a partial bag of cement? You keep it around for small repairs.

[Anne2719]

Does anybody remember the bag of cement that was in the driveway and was photographed by Katie and Gena (sp?) while the trial was going on? The prosecution put Gena on the witness list, but she didn't end up testifying. I'm trying to remember what the significance was of that bag.

ETA: I think Gena was going by Jordy back in those days.

[enlightenme]

I don't understand how Scott could have used cement around the pool or driveway in December. Who does projects like that in December - even in Modesto?

As for him throwing it out - that's not believable, either. Who throws out a partial bag of cement? You keep it around for small repairs.

You certainly don't sprinkle it on the driveway and hope for rain, as the defense expert tried to imply.

:biggrin:

[Otter]

Does anybody remember the bag of cement that was in the driveway and was photographed by Katie and Gena (sp?) while the trial was going on? The prosecution put Gena on the witness list, but she didn't end up testifying. I'm trying to remember what the significance was of that bag.

ETA: I think Gena was going by Jordy back in those days.

Katie and Jordy's excellent adventure.

http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/2005-01-13/news/katie-jordy-s-excellent-adventure/

Long read, but your answer is there.

Concrete was one of the case's big mysteries. Scott had admitted to police detectives that, soon before his wife's murder, he'd purchased a big bag of cement mix -- "something like" 60 to 90 pounds -- but could only produce one small anchor he'd made for his boat. Prosecutors argued that he used the rest to weigh down his wife's corpse, but Peterson said he'd shored up a fence post and fixed his driveway.

Could Peterson's attorney have placed the bag on the driveway to suggest to the neighbors that Scott really had worked on the driveway? It seemed too weird, but Monkman couldn't imagine what else it could mean.

"You'd better take a picture," she said.

"I already did," McCallie said.

They didn't know it then, but that picture would change their lives.

I miss katiecoollady and never got the opportunity to meet Jordy.

[Chocoholic]

From a Daily News article by Richard Cole
From a Daily News article by Richard Cole

Quote:
First, said Stephens, the 30 pounds of weights police believe Scott Peterson put on his wife's 153-pound corpse would not have sunk the body.

Any person who has ever gone scuba diving knows this is false. You only need about 10% of bodyweight in for instance lead weights to ensure a body is not positively buoyant (if not wearing a neoprene suit but a dry suit for instance). In other words, 15 lbs or more would have sunk Lacy.

[Chocoholic]

I don't understand how Scott could have used cement around the pool or driveway in December. Who does projects like that in December - even in Modesto?

As for him throwing it out - that's not believable, either. Who throws out a partial bag of cement? You keep it around for small repairs.

LOL wracking my brain here.... a foot for the Christmas tree? Painted paperweights for gifts? Some people are very creative.

[Wudge]

Any person who has ever gone scuba diving knows this is false. You only need about 10% of bodyweight in for instance lead weights to ensure a body is not positively buoyant (if not wearing a neoprene suit but a dry suit for instance). In other words, 15 lbs or more would have sunk Lacy.

Archimedes principle says what? And after gases set in, then what?

[Wudge]

IIRC, I looked up the instructions from the back of the bag on the 'net and they went like this:

"Pour mix in hole. Add water."

So if it was already raining, why add more water?

But even 90 lb wouldn't hold the body down. ISTR that smaller bodies have surfaced with as much or more weight even in fresh water.

And then there's the fact that no one can point to another case where someone has made weights ahead of time. Thus, IMO, we can disregard the whole 'weights' theory. There was a rumor that even the prosecutors later admitted that 'weights' theory was bunk, although I'm sure that wasn't posted anywhere.


Was this a mix for fence posts?

[Anne2719]

The best guide to future behavior is past behavior. Scott had none of the financial problems List had.
So the best guide to future behavior is past behavior, except when there are financial problems?

[Anne2719]

Link to any evidence Scott had or bought cement blocks please.
Please reread my post where I said "I THINK cement blocks would be very easy to find . . ." You want a link to what's floating around in my head? Good luck with that. I have attempted to be very clear about what is my opinion and what I state as fact, in contrast to some people I can think of.

[attorneywan2be]

So the best guide to future behavior is past behavior, except when there are financial problems?

I think JJ is saying that Scott had no financial problems in the past..at least that's the way I read it..

[Anne2719]

But I have seen a posting elsewhere that said Anne Bird spotted a similar pair for sale in an auction. What happened to those?
You still haven't provided the requested link about that, so I can't believe you saw any such thing. In any case, if it WERE true, I would wonder if those earrings were on the ears, attached to the head which is still missing. Just how unusual were those earrings, anyway?

[attorneywan2be]

You still haven't provided the requested link about that, so I can't believe you saw any such thing. In any case, if it WERE true, I would wonder if those earrings were on the ears, attached to the head which is still missing. Just how unusual were those earrings, anyway?

I think they were diamond earrings.. I agree, the missing earrings are a moot point simply because the head was missing...unless they were truly spotted somewhere by someone who could identify them..

[Anne2719]

Laci would leave grass clippings in her tote bag with a book and with a jacket stuffed in there and not hung up but that was not suspicious although she was a very neat housekeeper.
Link to the grass clippings, please?

[Anne2719]

Cadaver dogs would find no trace of Laci anywhere at or near the bay although they are almost infallible at doing this but that is believable.
Link to the "almost infallible" abilities of cadaver dogs, please?

[attorneywan2be]

No. Could is not the same as did. Did requires proof. Did anyone see the baby floating anywhere?

As far as I know, no one reported seeing the baby or Laci floating anywhere..

[Anne2719]

Scott could leave no trace evidence or cadaver scent at the house although forensic scientists say that is virtually impossible.
Link to scientists saying this is "virtually impossible" please?

[Anne2719]

The baby would separate from the body under water by a mechanism unknown to science.
Link, please.

[Anne2719]

The baby would have twine double knotted around its neck and arm under water by a mechanism unknown to science.
Having two knots in the same length of material (which was not twine, by definition) is not the same as being "double-knotted." Your use of the term is intentionally misleading, IMO.

[Anne2719]

The limbs and head would detach from the body by a mechanism unknown to science.
Link, please.

[Anne2719]

The mother's uterus would be 2 or 3 weeks post partum and too small for the baby to have been inside but that is normal in this case although unknown to science.
2-3 weeks postpartum? Link, please.

[Anne2719]

Conner separated from Laci after both were dead even though there was caffeine in Laci's system but none in Conner's system and despite the fact that caffeine crosses the placenta. This was as a result of factors unknown to science.
Links re: caffeine in Laci's system, not in Conner's system, and caffeine crossing the placenta (especially postmortem).

[Anne2719]

Finding Laci's body at the bay 2 miles from where Scott was boating 4 months previously proves that he killed her and dumped the body even though back tracking the tides and currents from where her body was found takes you to the Albany Bulb a day or two before.
Please provide links to back this up.

[Anne2719]

Finding Laci's body at the bay 2 miles from where Scott was boating 4 months previously proves that he killed her and dumped the body in the ocean even though when three floats were separately dropped off the Albany Bulb each went directly to where Laci's body was found.
Link to the floats, please.

[Anne2719]

Scott must be guilty even though after Frey recorded over 3000 taped calls to him no incriminating statements and no confessions were ever made by him.
Link to the number 3000 phone calls.

[Anne2719]

No registered sex offender or other parolee or other criminal could have been involved in the crime although 290 registered sex offenders and parolees were let off the hook with just saying, "Oh I was with my mother" or similar during a phone call and with no other verification at all.
Link to the info about the 290 sex offenders, please.

[Anne2719]

No one would have held Laci captive for any reason although in a recent case in Modesto a man was kidnapped and held for ransom by criminals.
Link to this other Modesto kidnapping, please.

[Anne2719]

Yes. He is the luckiest man who has or will ever live. He pulled off a one in one trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion (1 in 1E+132) chance. Is it any wonder I don't believe that?
Please back this up. How exactly did you do that math?

[Anne2719]

Please provide a link to any damage caused by his exiting the 'slit' in the womb while in an incredibly delicate condition - so soft his body could not be picked up.

IIRC< the testimony was that the only damage was caused by the body being handled well after death.
Link to that testimony, please.

[Anne2719]

Both women were pregnant. Both had the baby removed.
"Removed" implies facts which are far from being proven.

[Anne2719]

http://www.scottisinnocent.com/

Note the difference between the baby's size and the uterus.
That goes to the home page. The word "uterus" doesn't appear on that page. Please give an accurate link, and quote the part to which you're referring. I shouldn't have to read through massive amounts of material to find that there's nothing there.

[JustMyOpinion]

Are you assuming that after Scott killed Laci, she then got into and out of the tool box - all without leaving a trace of evidence?

I don't think Laci was in the toolbox.

[JustMyOpinion]

I agree. So why was so much of the case devoted to Frey and their 4 sexual encounters?

Out of the nineteen weeks of the State's case, how many days were devoted to Frey's testimony? How much of her actual testimony dealt with sexual encounters? How many of the recorded conversations between she and Scott that were played for the jury had content pertaining to sexual encounters? TIA.

[Miss Bootsie]

IIRC< the testimony was that the only damage was caused by the body being handled well after death.

Please provide a link to support this statement.

[JustMyOpinion]

Originally Posted by Anne2719
Link to scientists saying this is "virtually impossible" please?

http://pittsburghlive.com/x/tribune-review/trib/regional/s_283079.html

Absent any physical evidence, Wecht said, the jurors had to imagine Scott Peterson premeditated the murder, transported Laci Peterson's body to a dock, loaded it on a boat and dumped it in the sea -- all without leaving any physical evidence for investigators to find.

Given the advanced forensic techniques available to modern investigators, "This is not so easily accomplished," Wecht said.


"virtually impossible" does not equate to "this is not so easily accomplished"
IMO.

[One2Snoop]

Rick Distaso: And we'll talk about the receipts in a minute. So after you found
the dog and you checked his tags, what did you do next?
Karen Servas: I took his leash in my hand and I walked across my lawn and across
to Scott and Laci's house and I tried to open the front gate.
Rick Distaso:Okay. So you went here across your lawn?
Karen Servas: Correct.
Rick Distaso:And when you had the dog, how were you holding him as you were
walking him to the house or to the Peterson's house, how are you holding him, by
his fur, by his collar, by the leash?
Karen Servas: By the leash.
Rick Distaso:Okay. So the leash was still attached?
Karen Servas: Correct.
Rick Distaso:Can you describe for the jury what the condition of the leash was?
Karen Servas: The leash had, it was dirty it had leaves and, like, grass
clippings on it. It was moist.

Pin Kyo: I received a purse, a green and blue weave purse, and contained a
jacket and a novel. And I am referring to my notes. Again, I examined for -- I
take them out, take out the items. And I photographed it, and I examined each
item. In the purse lining I observed off-white watery stains inside. And I
tested it for blood. And it tested negative for blood. And I also observed
inside the purse plant -- grass debris. I did not collect -- I did not collect
them. And I examined the jacket. I observed a small reddish-brown stain in the
front close to the zipper area. And it tested negative for blood also. And I
also observed fibers, plant dirt debris on the shirt. And I did not collect
them. And I examined the novel book that's inside the -- come from the purse.
And I found a card, but no bloodstains observed on the book. So I didn't test
any stains on the book.

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
And no one connects the grass clippings on the leash to the grass in the purse,
a purse which contains the very items a woman might take to walk her dog in the
park? And to the grass on the black pants Scott described as did other
witnesses? And to the grass on towels in the house?

I'm not sure what the grass clippings would prove? They could've just as easily gotten there via Scott or they transferred there from another day/time. :shrug:

[Miss Bootsie]

Enough already. All of the assumptions were posted as my opinion.

You stated as fact, a witness testified to the following.



Originally Posted by Jim Jones
IIRC< the testimony was that the only damage was caused by the body being handled well after death.

Please quote the testimony.

[Anne2719]

http://www.crime-scene-investigator.net/cadaverdogs.html
Where is the reference to them being "almost infallible"?

ETA: And the scientific substantiation for this? Since this site is written by canine handlers, I'm unconvinced as to the accuracy of your claim.

[Anne2719]

http://pittsburghlive.com/x/tribune-.../s_283079.html (http://pittsburghlive.com/x/tribune-review/trib/regional/s_283079.html)

Absent any physical evidence, Wecht said, the jurors had to imagine Scott Peterson premeditated the murder, transported Laci Peterson's body to a dock, loaded it on a boat and dumped it in the sea -- all without leaving any physical evidence for investigators to find.

Given the advanced forensic techniques available to modern investigators, "This is not so easily accomplished," Wecht said.

"This is not so easily accomplished" is not exactly the same as "virtually impossible." Please supply a link to its being virtually impossible.

[Anne2719]

Catherine Crier:

p. 41. (Karen) Servas described her relationship with Scott Peterson as warm and friendly. She and her ten-year-old son were frequently invited to swim in the Petersons' pool; from time to time, Scott helped her with chores and repairs around her house. She described the couple as active and upbeat. They enjoyed entertaining at their home and appeared to have a good relationship. Servas had last seen Laci and Scott on Sunday, the twenty-second, when they told her that their baby was a boy. They were planning to name him Conner.

p. 67. She and Scott discussed fertility tests, but before they could pursue the idea, Laci got the news she'd been waiting for: She was pregnant at last. She was overjoyed, and Scott seemed to share her feelings. Laci's mother recalled watching Scott hurry over to feel Laci's stomach when she said the baby was kicking. He seemed as excited as she was. "I assume if he didn't want to have a child, he wouldn't have allowed it to happen," Sharon told investigators.

p. 69. Relatives told police that (Laci) even used a wheelchair while visiting Disneyland with Scott's parents and half sister, Anne Bird (It was Scott who pushed her all over Disneyland in the chair) ... In our interview, Anne told me that Laci looked radiant during that trip. She was excited about having the baby and talked a lot about how much she loved her mother, Sharon. Anne first met Laci in March 1998, about seven months after the wedding. She liked her immediately. Laci filled up the room, loved being the center of attention, and rarely let anyone else get a word in edgewise. Like Laci's other girlfriends, Anne agreed that Laci did boss Scott around. And, like those women, Anne wished she had a husband like Scott, who did everything his wife told him with a smile.

pp. 322,323. Anne (Bird) recalled that Scott and Laci seemed "very happy" during the family's Thanksgiving trip. Scott had even rented Laci a wheelchair so that he could wheel his pregnant wife around Disney's California Adventure Park and "pamper her." Anne didn't think Laci needed the wheelchair, but she went along with it to humor Scott. Scott told police he had rented it "to cut down on the amount of walking" she had to do. The young couple appeared to get along well, and Scott seemed excited over his impending fatherhood. During the trip, he carried Anne's six-month-old son in a car seat. He even comforted him one night at dinner and managed to stop his crying, Anne recalled.
Lucky for you that coconut55 on Amazon already keyed all that in for you, isn't it?

[Anne2719]

And then up comes the body - but it never did. That's because it was never there.
In YOUR opinion.

[Anne2719]

Isn't that the wrong way around? Can you provide a link to something explaining this unknown phenomenon as I know of no such mechanism.
You have claimed "The baby would separate from the body under water by a mechanism unknown to science." The medical examiner explained that to my satisfaction. How could it not be known to science?

[Anne2719]

Enough already. All of the assumptions were posted as my opinion.
Where have you stated that anything is your opinion? And I would like to see how you stated that all the things you've stated as facts without substantiation were your opinion.

[Anne2719]

Enough already. All of the assumptions were posted as my opinion.
Bottom line, Jim, is that you can't or won't substantiate the things you state as "fact." Doesn't matter what you might say in your sig line (which I can't see, since I have disabled sig lines) -- sig lines can't be used as a disclaimer. You either clearly state that something is your opinion, or you provide a link. I've asked you for links and I'm still waiting for them.

[Wearing A Halo]

Enough already. All of the assumptions were posted as my opinion.


You finally got it that all you offer are assumptions.

[enlightenme]

And the expert Geragos brought in proved it WAS the cement mix Scott bought.

The prosecution expert said that didn't match the driveway cement.

The defense expert said that Scott sprinkled dry cement on his driveway.

The jury is free to decide which, if any, expert testimony they believe.

[JustMyOpinion]

The prosecution expert said that didn't match the driveway cement.

The defense expert said that Scott sprinkled dry cement on his driveway.

The jury is free to decide which, if any, expert testimony they believe.

ITA.
http://www.courttv.com/trials/peterson/101804_ctv.html
SNIP:This year, the neighbors to the north of the Peterson's installed an in-ground swimming pool and a sidewalk, as well as cement footing to their home, and prosecutor Dave Harris said the construction workers accessed the property through the Peterson's driveway and yard and used their driveway as a storage area.

Judge Alfred Delucchi permitted the testimony of both men, but allowed Harris to quiz Jensen about the possibility of tainting.

Jensen insisted the area where he took samples was not affected by the construction. He said to his knowledge, there was never any concrete from the project in the driveway.

Moments later, Harris showed the investigator a photo of the driveway. Although the prosecutor did not identify the source of the picture, it is identical to one two Courttv.com message board users posted online after an August trip to Modesto.

"What is that?" Harris said, pointing to an object in the driveway.

Jensen stared at the photo and then said, "Concrete mix."

"In the driveway of the Peterson house?" Harris asked.

Jensen paused and then answered, "Yeah."

In the front row of the jury box, a male juror smiled and shook his head.

http://www.courttv.com/trials/peterson/101804_ctv.html

[JustMyOpinion]

ITA.
http://www.courttv.com/trials/peterson/101804_ctv.html
SNIP:
Moments later, Harris showed the investigator a photo of the driveway. Although the prosecutor did not identify the source of the picture, it is identical to one two Courttv.com message board users posted online after an August trip to Modesto.

"What is that?" Harris said, pointing to an object in the driveway.

Jensen stared at the photo and then said, "Concrete mix."

"In the driveway of the Peterson house?" Harris asked.

Jensen paused and then answered, "Yeah."

In the front row of the jury box, a male juror smiled and shook his head.

http://www.courttv.com/trials/peterson/101804_ctv.html

More on investigator Jensen & Geragos:
http://www.asginvestigations.com/pi-stories/index.php?m=200510
Former FBI agent says lawyer owes him $34,780
No blood on knife found at Peterson home

By GARTH STAPLEY
BEE STAFF WRITER
Last Updated: August 12, 2005, 04:11:35 AM PDT

Scott Peterson’s attorney failed to pay a private investigator nearly $35,000 owed for work on the sensational death penalty case, according to a breach of contract lawsuit.

Carl W. Jensen, a former FBI agent, worked to clear Peterson of double-murder charges from January 2004 until a judge affirmed Peterson’s death sentence in March, Jensen’s attorney said.

In a pretrial meeting at Modesto’s DoubleTree Hotel, Peterson attorney Mark Geragos agreed to pay Jensen $12,500 for one month and $6,000 for subsequent months, the lawsuit reads. Jensen eventually got $42,400, but that’s $34,780 short of what he earned, according to the lawsuit.

“(Jensen) sent invoices, but they stiffed him,” said his Stockton attorney, Kevin M. Seibert.

He said he sent the lawsuit Friday to Stanislaus County Superior Court in Modesto; a court clerk on Wednesday said it takes at least a week to file civil complaints after receiving them.

Calls to Geragos’ Los Angeles office went unreturned Wednesday.

In an unrelated case, Geragos recently appealed a Chico judge’s order that he pay a trial consultant who also said Geragos refused to pay for services on the Peterson case.

Scott Peterson, 32, was convicted of murdering his pregnant wife, Laci, and their unborn son, Conner, in a trial that stretched through much of last year.

Seibert said Geragos wrote in a letter that Jensen’s claim is invalid because “some of the bills were after the trial.”

Jensen had run down leads for Geragos’ unsuccessful motion for a new trial in March, three months after jurors sentenced Peterson to death and just before a judge affirmed the verdict, according to court documents. Jensen’s work suggested burglars had kidnapped Laci Peterson.

Jensen, who previously worked in FBI foreign counterintelligence, was Peterson’s first defense witness called by Geragos at trial in October. He testified about photos he took of concrete at the Peterson home.

Seibert said Wednesday that Matt Geragos, Mark Geragos’ brother and an attorney with the family firm, said in a phone call that Jensen had agreed to work for free if judges refused to honor requests for pay to Peterson’s experts from taxpayer money.

“I don’t think they’ll be successful arguing that a retired FBI guy volunteers his work,” Seibert said.

A three-judge panel ordered Stanislaus County to pay Peterson’s unidentified experts $229,000 after his supporters ran out of money, according to county documents. State law on indigent defense funding prevents finding out precisely where the money went.

“I just don’t understand why the guy is blowing us off,” Seibert said. “We sent him a letter so he could avoid this kind of publicity, as a courtesy. But he didn’t offer any money to pay.”

In the Chico case, nationally recognized trial consultant Edward J. Bronson won a $5,112 judgment against Geragos in a similar breach-of-contract claim. Geragos appealed the decision June 29.

http://www.asginvestigations.com/pi-stories/index.php?m=200510

[USAHICK]

More on investigator Jensen & Geragos:
http://www.asginvestigations.com/pi-stories/index.php?m=200510
Former FBI agent says lawyer owes him $34,780
No blood on knife found at Peterson home

By GARTH STAPLEY
BEE STAFF WRITER
Last Updated: August 12, 2005, 04:11:35 AM PDT

Scott Peterson’s attorney failed to pay a private investigator nearly $35,000 owed for work on the sensational death penalty case, according to a breach of contract lawsuit.

Carl W. Jensen, a former FBI agent, worked to clear Peterson of double-murder charges from January 2004 until a judge affirmed Peterson’s death sentence in March, Jensen’s attorney said.

In a pretrial meeting at Modesto’s DoubleTree Hotel, Peterson attorney Mark Geragos agreed to pay Jensen $12,500 for one month and $6,000 for subsequent months, the lawsuit reads. Jensen eventually got $42,400, but that’s $34,780 short of what he earned, according to the lawsuit.

“(Jensen) sent invoices, but they stiffed him,” said his Stockton attorney, Kevin M. Seibert.

He said he sent the lawsuit Friday to Stanislaus County Superior Court in Modesto; a court clerk on Wednesday said it takes at least a week to file civil complaints after receiving them.

Calls to Geragos’ Los Angeles office went unreturned Wednesday.

In an unrelated case, Geragos recently appealed a Chico judge’s order that he pay a trial consultant who also said Geragos refused to pay for services on the Peterson case.

Scott Peterson, 32, was convicted of murdering his pregnant wife, Laci, and their unborn son, Conner, in a trial that stretched through much of last year.

Seibert said Geragos wrote in a letter that Jensen’s claim is invalid because “some of the bills were after the trial.”

Jensen had run down leads for Geragos’ unsuccessful motion for a new trial in March, three months after jurors sentenced Peterson to death and just before a judge affirmed the verdict, according to court documents. Jensen’s work suggested burglars had kidnapped Laci Peterson.

Jensen, who previously worked in FBI foreign counterintelligence, was Peterson’s first defense witness called by Geragos at trial in October. He testified about photos he took of concrete at the Peterson home.

Seibert said Wednesday that Matt Geragos, Mark Geragos’ brother and an attorney with the family firm, said in a phone call that Jensen had agreed to work for free if judges refused to honor requests for pay to Peterson’s experts from taxpayer money.

“I don’t think they’ll be successful arguing that a retired FBI guy volunteers his work,” Seibert said.

A three-judge panel ordered Stanislaus County to pay Peterson’s unidentified experts $229,000 after his supporters ran out of money, according to county documents. State law on indigent defense funding prevents finding out precisely where the money went.

“I just don’t understand why the guy is blowing us off,” Seibert said. “We sent him a letter so he could avoid this kind of publicity, as a courtesy. But he didn’t offer any money to pay.”

In the Chico case, nationally recognized trial consultant Edward J. Bronson won a $5,112 judgment against Geragos in a similar breach-of-contract claim. Geragos appealed the decision June 29.

http://www.asginvestigations.com/pi-stories/index.php?m=200510


JMO - Geragos reminds me of a slick (greasy) used-car salesman. Remember he was taking DONATIONS for Petersons appeal? Wonder what he did with those dontations. Reminds me of another DRISP supporter who takes cash and doesn't account for it to anyone.

[Lavindar]

More on investigator Jensen & Geragos:
http://www.asginvestigations.com/pi-stories/index.php?m=200510
Former FBI agent says lawyer owes him $34,780
No blood on knife found at Peterson home

By GARTH STAPLEY
BEE STAFF WRITER
Last Updated: August 12, 2005, 04:11:35 AM PDT

Scott Peterson’s attorney failed to pay a private investigator nearly $35,000 owed for work on the sensational death penalty case, according to a breach of contract lawsuit.

Carl W. Jensen, a former FBI agent, worked to clear Peterson of double-murder charges from January 2004 until a judge affirmed Peterson’s death sentence in March, Jensen’s attorney said.

In a pretrial meeting at Modesto’s DoubleTree Hotel, Peterson attorney Mark Geragos agreed to pay Jensen $12,500 for one month and $6,000 for subsequent months, the lawsuit reads. Jensen eventually got $42,400, but that’s $34,780 short of what he earned, according to the lawsuit.

“(Jensen) sent invoices, but they stiffed him,” said his Stockton attorney, Kevin M. Seibert.

He said he sent the lawsuit Friday to Stanislaus County Superior Court in Modesto; a court clerk on Wednesday said it takes at least a week to file civil complaints after receiving them.

Calls to Geragos’ Los Angeles office went unreturned Wednesday.

In an unrelated case, Geragos recently appealed a Chico judge’s order that he pay a trial consultant who also said Geragos refused to pay for services on the Peterson case.

Scott Peterson, 32, was convicted of murdering his pregnant wife, Laci, and their unborn son, Conner, in a trial that stretched through much of last year.

Seibert said Geragos wrote in a letter that Jensen’s claim is invalid because “some of the bills were after the trial.”

Jensen had run down leads for Geragos’ unsuccessful motion for a new trial in March, three months after jurors sentenced Peterson to death and just before a judge affirmed the verdict, according to court documents. Jensen’s work suggested burglars had kidnapped Laci Peterson.

Jensen, who previously worked in FBI foreign counterintelligence, was Peterson’s first defense witness called by Geragos at trial in October. He testified about photos he took of concrete at the Peterson home.

Seibert said Wednesday that Matt Geragos, Mark Geragos’ brother and an attorney with the family firm, said in a phone call that Jensen had agreed to work for free if judges refused to honor requests for pay to Peterson’s experts from taxpayer money.

“I don’t think they’ll be successful arguing that a retired FBI guy volunteers his work,” Seibert said.

A three-judge panel ordered Stanislaus County to pay Peterson’s unidentified experts $229,000 after his supporters ran out of money, according to county documents. State law on indigent defense funding prevents finding out precisely where the money went.

“I just don’t understand why the guy is blowing us off,” Seibert said. “We sent him a letter so he could avoid this kind of publicity, as a courtesy. But he didn’t offer any money to pay.”

In the Chico case, nationally recognized trial consultant Edward J. Bronson won a $5,112 judgment against Geragos in a similar breach-of-contract claim. Geragos appealed the decision June 29.

http://www.asginvestigations.com/pi-stories/index.php?m=200510IIRC this is not the only PI that Garegos has not paid. Such an ethical guy. If you or I didn't pay a bill, we'd be garnished for the money so fast. But obviously becasuse he's a lawyer, he thinks he can get away with doing things ordinary citizens can't.

[Otter]

IIRC this is not the only PI that Garegos has not paid. Such an ethical guy. If you or I didn't pay a bill, we'd be garnished for the money so fast. But obviously becasuse he's a lawyer, he thinks he can get away with doing things ordinary citizens can't.

He's the fearsome wizard behind the curtain, special as special can be. *Otterwavesapieceofpaperaroundintheair* Just don't look behind it. :)

[Miss Bootsie]

*Snipped

JMO - Geragos reminds me of a slick (greasy) used-car salesman. *Snipped



http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c384/3232mypic/s_giggle.gifExactly