Evidence that points to other suspects

[attorneywan2be]

Let's discuss theories about other suspects..

IMO, there is overwhelming evidence that indicates that the burglars abducted and murdered Laci..

1-According to the defense motion for a new trial, Adam Tenbrink told the defense investigator that Todd approached him on the 24th asking him for help in a burglary that had already started...this tells us that the burglary was interrupted..IMO, Laci's confrontation with Todd was the reason he could not complete the burglary because he had to take care of Laci first....

2-Diane Jackson reported to the police that the burglary took place around 11:40 am on the 24th..and that she saw them removing a safe from the Medinas's house..

3-The police did indeed find the Medinas's safe in Todd's possession...that corroborates Diane's report..

Conclusion:1 + 2 +3= Todd burglarized the Medinas's house on the morning of the 24th..around the same time Laci disappeared...however, something serious happened that compelled him to leave the scene before completing the burglary!! what happened?

4-Lt. Aponte heard a telephone conversation between Shawn Tenbrink and his brother Adam Tenbrink..they were talking about Laci confronting Todd as he was burglarizing the Medinas's house..and that Todd threatened her..

5-"Mr. R" an inmate at Stanislaus county jail told the defense that he had information regarding Laci's ABDUCTION...he gave them few names, when the defense ran those names on their computer database they got the Aponte's tip that they had overlooked...that tells us 2 things: a- Laci was abducted by Todd..b- the Aponte's report was corroborated by an independent source "Mr. R"..and Mr. R's statement was corroborated by the Aponte's report..

Conclusion: 4+5 = On the 24th Laci had a confrontation with Todd that led to her abduction and ultimately her murder...that was the interruption that compelled Todd to leave the scene before completing the burglary..

6-Few days after Laci's disappearance, Deanna Renfro Pawned what I believe was Laci's MISSING Croton watch...to this date this watch is still missing..Deanna Renfro has a criminal records, there is a strong possibility she is connected to the burglars...

Final Conclusion: 1+2+3+4+5+6+7 = the burglars did it..that's my opinion..

[Wudge]

Detective Grogan read Bates #14765 into the trial record. This is why we know Diane Jackson reported at 4:10PM on 12/26 that she saw three men, a van and a safe in front of the Medina's home at 11:40AM on 12/24.

Before Detective Grogan took the stand, Susan Medina testified that she and her husband did not arrive home from their Xmas trip until after 4:10 on 12/26. Thus, at the time of Ms. Jackson reporting, the Medina’s did not know they had been burglarized and their safe had been taken from their home.

Further, as a result of Diane Jackson’s reported sighting, Officer Steele had a 459 (burglary) recorded as taking place at the Medina’s residence. And this recording of a burglary was made because of Diane Jackson report at 4:10PM on 12/26, which, again, was before the Medinas knew their home had been, indeed, burglarized.

Obviously, Diane Jackson could not possibly have known a safe was stolen from the Medina's house; i.e., unless she had seen it with her own eyes at 11:40AM on 12/24.

Moreover, Susan’s Medina’s testimony also established that because of their business, the Medina's had a security mailbox and a good sized safe -- the safe required three men to carry it into their home.

She also testified that when they had outgoing mail, they would lift a flap and place their outgoing mail into their mailbox. And that when the postman, Mr. Graybill came to their home, the design of the mailbox required him to first remove any outgoing mail before he was able to slip the incoming mail into a special slot.

Susan Medina further testified that she had a lot of outgoing mail on 12/24, and that it was placed in their mailbox for pick-up just before they left on their trip at just around 10:30AM on 12/24. Therefore, the postman, Mr. Graybill, would have needed to remove that outgoing mail before he could have delivered any incoming mail on 12/24.


At this time, it is important to note that, per the testimony in the trial record, it is undisputed that the Medina's security mailbox made it impossible for a passer bye to see any incoming mail. However, Officer Hicks provided testimony as to the burglars’ storyline, and Steven Todd's storyline was that he targeted the Medina's residence, because, as he passed by their home, one of the Medina's cars was gone and mail was visible in their mailbox.

Now, we know that Steven Todd could not have seen any incoming mail, because that is physically impossible. Further, we know that Susan Medina said they had left a lot of outgoing mail just before they left on their trip around 10:30AM on 12/24. Further still, we know that Steven Todd says that he saw mail in the Medina's mailbox as he passed by their residence. However, if Steven Todd saw mail in the Medina's mailbox, it had to be outgoing mail.

Additionally, we know that on 12/24, the postman, Mr. Graybill, was delivering his mail that morning between 10:35AM to 10:50AM. Thus, we know too that after 10:50AM on 12/24, there would have been no outgoing mail that Steven Todd could have seen that day. And we know that there was no mail delivery on 12/25, and we know that the Medina's were away on 12/25. So the Medinas could not have placed any outgoing mail in their mailbox that day.

Further yet, from Officer Hick’s testimony, we know that the burglar’s storyline is that they removed the safe from the Medina's home in the early morning hours on 12/26 -- somewhere in the timeframe of 6:30AM to 7:30AM. Hence, we know that the burglars could not have seen any mail activity, whatsoever, that occurred on 12/26, and we know that the Medina's did not even arrive back home before 4:10PM on 12/26.

Given all of the above, we know that if Steven Todd saw mail in the Medina's mailbox, it had to be outgoing mail. And the punch line is that the only time where there would have been any outgoing mail to see on either 12/24, 12/25 or 12/26 was between 10:30AM (the time that Medina’s left on their trip) and 10:50AM on 12/24.

Therefore, Steven Todd's own storyline places the burglars right at the Medina's home between 10:30AM and 10:50AM on 12/24 -- the time when Laci was supposed to have been walking McKenzie.

Summing up, Steven Todd's own storyline supports the accuracy and sensibility of Diane Jackson's report that she made at 4:10PM on 12/26, wherein she reported seeing a safe in front of the Medina’s home around 11:40AM on 12/26. And, as a reminder of the kicker I previously noted, Diane Jackson's report was made before the Medina's even arrived back home to find out that burglars had taken their safe and that Officer Steele already had a 459 (burglary) recorded for their home.

These multiple impeachments of the burglars’ storyline are proof-positive that the burglary took place on 12/24 instead of on 12/26 as the burglars claim. And if the burglars lied about the 12/26 date, it clearly gives support to Lieutenant Aponte’s reporting that he heard a conversation that said an inmate, Steven Todd, had threatened Laci.

Finally, in his closing argument, Distaso never claimed that the burglary took place on 12/26, never.

Given their criminal history, the burglars should not only be considered alternative suspects but prime suspects, for they would have had means, motive and opportunity.

[One2Snoop]

[quote=attorneywan2be;8831604]Let's discuss theories about other suspects..

IMO, there is overwhelming evidence that indicates that the burglars abducted and murdered Laci..

Lawyers for Scott Peterson, whose double-murder trial began June 1, have suggested that his wife could have been abducted while interrupting the crime.

"My answer to that is, I didn't have nothing to do with it," Pearce said. "I never knew she was gone. I never even heard of her till all this s--- happened."
Peterson's attorneys are scheduled Monday to begin calling witnesses. In addition to the burglary theory, the attorneys have said vagrants in Dry Creek Regional Park might have abducted Laci Peterson.

Pearce, who turns 46 on Thursday, said Steven Wayne Todd awakened him early Dec. 26, 2002 -- two days after the pregnant woman was reported missing. Pearce said he drove Todd in a Chevrolet Corsica to Covena Avenue about 6:30 a.m. and parked in front of a house.

Todd already had been to the house more than once the night before, Pearce said. The residents were away on a holiday trip. Todd used a dolly to bring a safe to the car, he said.

It yielded about $50,000 worth of jewelry and some weapons, much of which later was recovered.

"I didn't get out of the car," Pearce said. "I pulled up, he threw it in the car and we came back home."

The men were arrested Jan. 2, 2003, after police received an anonymous tip. The next day, Pearce answered about 10 polygraph questions administered by police, some having to do with Laci Peterson, he said.

"(The polygrapher) asked if I knew anything about her disappearance, and I told them 'no,'" Pearce said. "She said I passed it."

Statement backs police position
Police always have maintained that there was no link between the burglary and Laci Peterson's disappearance.

http://trialblog.tripod.com/

[thinkaboutit]

One2Snoop all your quotes were from Pearce - and I agree with you - I don't think Pearce was involved in the abduction of Laci Peterson - Todd is another story.

[One2Snoop]

Originally Posted by thinkaboutit

One2Snoop all your quotes were from Pearce - and I agree with you - I don't think Pearce was involved in the abduction of Laci Peterson - Todd is another story.

How could he be. Pearce said Todd had been there the day before - which would be Christmas day. And from what the above says it doesn't sound like Todd even had a car - why else would he contact Pearce? It sounded like he needed a vehicle to transport the goods, IMO.

[One2Snoop]

Burglary suspects
didn't takeLaci
April 21, 2003

A burglary across the street from Laci Peterson's home had nothing to do with the
Modesto woman's disappearance, police confirmed Friday. The announcement coincided
with police saying they had arrested two suspects in the burglary and determined that
they were not involved in the missing-person case.
Detective Doug Ridenour said the men were booked late Thursday at
Stanislaus County Jail. Chief Deputy District Attorney John Goold would not
comment on whether the two men who pleaded guilty to charges related to a
burglary at a home in the Petersons' neighborhood would be called to testify.

Police arrested burglary suspects Steven Wayne Todd, 36, and Donald Glenn Pearce,
44, on Jan. 2 after receiving an anonymous tip, according to police documents and
the two were far more cooperative than suspects usually are with police.

"It was bad luck on their part," Det. George Stough said. (Steven Todd) said he
was scared that he was going to be associated with Laci's disappearance."

Thursday, state parole officers received a tip from someone who directed police
to Todd and Pearce, Stough said. They gave numerous statements and facts that
checked out, convincing police that the two men were telling the truth.

Todd told investigators that he traveled the La Loma area often and recognized a home that
looked empty the morning after Christmas. He said he and Pearce entered the home about
4 a.m. and stayed for about 3 1/2 hours, Stough said. Police listed the time of the burglary
at the home of Susan Medina on Covena Avenue in the La Loma neighborhood at
6:30 a.m. Dec. 26. Attorneys for both sides refused to say whether there was
evidence Todd and Pearce were in the neighborhood before that.
snip

http://www.findlaci2003.us/burlary-suspects.html

[thinkaboutit]

Originally Posted by One2Snoop

How could he be. Pearce said Todd had been there the day before - which would be Christmas day. And from what the above says it doesn't sound like Todd even had a car - why else would he contact Pearce? It sounded like he needed a vehicle to transport the goods, IMO.

One2Snoop why should we take what convicted felons say on their word? Which is exactly what MPD did. Todd said several things that were proven untrue. He said he saw mail in the Medina's mailbox - as Wudge said - it was undisputed that the only possible mail he could have seen in the Medina's mailbox was outgoing mail - which was gone by 10:50 a.m. on the 24th. He also said the Medina house looked empty because one car was gone. There was another parked in their driveway. How can one assume no one is home with a car in the driveway? Isn't it more likely that he saw the Medina's packing their other car up the morning of the 24th? He also told MPD that he had involved Pearce in the entire burglary - Pearce says no way - he only pulled up to the front of the house - the safe was already outside and Todd loaded it up and drove away. I'm sure you're familiar with the list of items Todd claims to have transported via his bicycle. A rolling tool box with tools in it that Susan Medina testified was too heavy for her husband to pick up, another 24-inch tool box full of tools, weedeater, electric saw, just to name a few. This burglary did not happen the way Todd claimed it did.

Are you familiar with the Aponte tip? The Tenbrink brothers were talking on the phone amongst themselves (or so they thought) about how Laci had interrupted Todd and Todd verbally threatened her. How can that be discounted? Even if Todd didn't have something to do with Laci's demise - the statement by Tenbrink that Todd saw Laci and vice versa - completely exonerates Scott.

[attorneywan2be]

Unfortunately, sometimes police do clear the wrong people..

Please explain, why would 2 INDEPENDENT sources give details that would lead to the burglars being Laci's abductors..it couldn't be that both of those sources were coincidentally lying saying the same thing..and why would a Lt. Aponte lie?

Lt. Aponte reported that an inmate and his brother talked about Laci confronting Todd as HE WAS BURGLARIZING the Medina's house..
Then Mr. R ( atotally independent source) provided information that corroborated that report..

In addition to that, there is a 3rd source: Diane Jackson reported seeing the burglars removing the safe at 11:40 am on December 24th...
The safe was indeed found in Todd's possession...mind you, Diane reported the burglary BEFORE the Medinas returned to their home..

Add to that, there was no way for the burglars to commit the burglary on December 26th, police cars..media cars were all over the place..IMPOSSIBLE..!

[Toggie]

Originally Posted by attorneywan2be

Unfortunately, sometimes police do clear the wrong people..

Please explain, why would 2 INDEPENDENT sources give details that would lead to the burglars being Laci's abductors..it couldn't be that both of those sources were coincidentally lying saying the same thing..and why would a Lt. Aponte lie?

Lt. Aponte reported that an inmate and his brother talked about Laci confronting Todd as HE WAS BURGLARIZING the Medina's house..
Then Mr. R ( atotally independent source) provided information that corroborated that report..

In addition to that, there is a 3rd source: Diane Jackson reported seeing the burglars removing the safe at 11:40 am on December 24th...
The safe was indeed found in Todd's possession...mind you, Diane reported the burglary BEFORE the Medinas returned to their home..

Add to that, there was no way for the burglars to commit the burglary on December 26th, police cars..media cars were all over the place..IMPOSSIBLE..!

Why would the MPD clear Todd of Laci's disappearance? If they thought for one minute Todd was involved or knew something, why not grab him and bring him in for questioning? Why go through all the trouble surveilling Scott? Scott didn't have a prior record, Todd did. Is it possible the MPD knew Scott was involved in "something"? I think so...There was a mighty big reward involved, I think if Pearce knew Todd did something to Laci or vice-versa, they would have turned on each other after striking a deal.

I honestly don't think Todd had anything to do with Laci's disappearance. I think Scott either did it or paid someone to do it for him.

IMO

[Wudge]

Originally Posted by Toggie

Why would the MPD clear Todd of Laci's disappearance? If they thought for one minute Todd was involved or knew something, why not grab him and bring him in for questioning? Why go through all the trouble surveilling Scott? Scott didn't have a prior record, Todd did. Is it possible the MPD knew Scott was involved in "something"? I think so...There was a mighty big reward involved, I think if Pearce knew Todd did something to Laci or vice-versa, they would have turned on each other after striking a deal for themselves.

I honestly don't think Todd had anything to do with Laci's disappearance. I think Scott either did it or paid someone to do it for him.

IMO

They knew Scott was guilty. So dissecting the burglar's storyline would have been a waste of time.

[attorneywan2be]

Originally Posted by Toggie

Why would the MPD clear Todd of Laci's disappearance? If they thought for one minute Todd was involved or knew something, why not grab him and bring him in for questioning? Why go through all the trouble surveilling Scott? Scott didn't have a prior record, Todd did. Is it possible the MPD knew Scott was involved in "something"? I think so...There was a mighty big reward involved, I think if Pearce knew Todd did something to Laci or vice-versa, they would have turned on each other after striking a deal.

I honestly don't think Todd had anything to do with Laci's disappearance. I think Scott either did it or paid someone to do it for him.

IMO

Note: you didn't address the points I made.. I hope someone would answer my questions before concluding that the burglars had nothing to do with it..

As to your question, let me start by asking you...have you ever heard of police releasing the real killer/rapist and arresting the wrong person?? if the answer to this question is "yes"..then I rest my case..if your answer to the question is "no"...then I suggest you read about wrongful convictions..read about cases where the police had the right man but decided to release him because they mistakenly concluded he was not involved.....police do make mistakes....

[Toggie]

Originally Posted by attorneywan2be

Note: you didn't address the points I made.. I hope someone would answer my questions before concluding that the burglars had nothing to do with it..

As to your question, let me start by asking you...have you ever heard of police releasing the real killer/rapist and arresting the wrong person?? if the answer to this question is "yes"..then I rest my case..if your answer to the question is "no"...then I suggest you read about wrongful convictions..read about cases where the police had the right man but decided to release him because they mistakenly concluded he was not involved.....police do make mistakes....

I realize police do make mistakes...after all they are human. Todd & Pearce were petty criminals. Todd was out looking for stuff to steal to buy his kids Christmas presents IIRC. Todd was on a bike. Todd had to go looking for Pearce in order for him to have a car to load up his stolen goods....I honestly don't think they were involved...The MPD cleared them but could never seem to get past Scott.

[Beebee]

Originally Posted by thinkaboutit

Are you familiar with the Aponte tip? The Tenbrink brothers were talking on the phone amongst themselves (or so they thought) about how Laci had interrupted Todd and Todd verbally threatened her. How can that be discounted? Even if Todd didn't have something to do with Laci's demise - the statement by Tenbrink that Todd saw Laci and vice versa - completely exonerates Scott.

I totally agree.

There was a lot to work with here, but for the MPD and Geragos it was too little too late-- and nobody put it together for Delucchi. I fully believe Steve Todd saw Laci after Scott left.

Delucchi used the timeline of Karen Servas to turn down the motion for a new trial which was in part based on the Aponte information.

[Beebee]

Originally Posted by hedidit

First of all SII is filled with lies and the transcripts were edited to suit Marlene Newell's

Marlene Newell did many, many people a huge service by making the transcripts available for download. She spent MONTHS buying, collecting and preparing them, and it had nothing to do with editing content. It had to do with formatting. She is not in "hiding", you are being ridiculous.

Don't spread misinformation, and stop the personal attacks. This forum thankfully is heavily moderated and personal attacks will not be tolerated.

[Beebee]

Speaking of Aponte, a reporter from the New York Post e-mailed me a couple days ago wanting info on the Tenbrink brothers. I e-mailed her the Aponte report. She said she was "reading about the case on-line" and became interested in the Tenbrinks. Interesting because now that I think about it, where is there info on the Tenbrinks? Anyhow- I'll post the Aponte report in case anyone wants to read it.

Person Interviewed: Lt. Xavier Aponte
Employment: California Department of Corrections
Position: Lieutenant
Address: California Rehabilitation Center, PO Box 1841, Norco, CA 92860
Telephone: (951) 273-2967

Results of Interview

On 12/01/2004, at 9:40 AM, Lt. Xavier Aponte was interviewed in his office at California Rehabilitation Center regarding a recorded conversation between inmate Shawn Tenbrink and his brother Adam Tenbrink that occurred in the month of January 2003. Lt. Aponte was asked if the interview could be taped recorded and he said that he preferred that it not be recorded. Lt. Aponte provided the following information.

Lt. Aponte has been employed by the State of California, Department of Corrections for 18 years. From April 26, 1999 until February 2003, he was assigned to the Investigations Unit at California Rehabilitation Center. On February 18, 2003 he had a job change to Watch Commander.

California Rehab Center records inmate telephone calls to outside parties via the Inmate Monitoring and Recording System abbreviated IMARS. Inmates are allowed to place one (1) collect call per day for 15 minutes to outside parties. When the call is placed and connected a recording comes on at the beginning advising the party called that call is an inmate at a California Correctional Facility and that the call is monitored (recorded). The IMARS tapes used to be recycled within 30-60 days when the system was originally installed because the tapes were expensive and the budget limited. With an expanded budget, more tapes were purchased so that recordings could be kept one (1) year. Sometime after January 2003, the IMARS was changed to a new system whereby it became easier to retrieve recorded messages over a longer period of time. The old system was basically just a recording system and if the tape was recycled or lost then the recorded conversation was permanently lost. On the new system, it is possible to retrieve the recorded conversation from a company back East.

Lt. Aponte first became aware of Shawn Tenbrink talking about Laci Peterson within a couple weeks of her missing. Shawn was talking about Laci missing while he was out in his housing unit. A housing staff person left a message on Lt. Aponte’s voice mail and he immediately called the Modesto Police Department Hotline. He called a second time within the same week because he did not receive a call back from his first telephone call. Lt. Aponte said it was at least a week before anyone got back to him. Lt. Aponte said a detective called him back and arrangements were made for the detective to interview Shawn Tenbrink. Lt. Aponte believes that it was after he spoke to the detective that he listened to the recorded conversation between Shawn Tenbrink and his brother Adam Tenbrink. To the best of his recollection, Adam Tenbrink talked to Shawn Tenbrink about Laci Peterson missing and mentioned that that Laci happened to walk up while Steven Todd was doing the burglary and Todd made some kind of threat to Laci.

Lt. Aponte did not recall the name of the detective, however when asked about the names Craig Grogan, Al Brocchini, Mark Smith and Owens, Lt. Aponte said Grogan sounded familiar. Lt. Aponte said he recalls the names (black out… looks like two names) and Steve Todd from the recorded telephone conversation. The telephone call lasted about 3-4 minutes.

The detective from MPD came down to California Rehabilitation Center and interviewed (blacked out) within the first couple of weeks from his first call to the MPD hotline. Lt. Aponte did not recall the date of the interview. When Shawn Tenbrink walked into Lt. Aponte’s office for the interview he appeared scared. In retrospect, Lt. Aponte does not know if it was the environment Shawn was in that made him afraid or something else. By environment, Lt. Aponte was referring to Shawn being interviewed by the police in his office. Lt. Aponte specifically recalls Shawn denying having a conversation with his brother Adam and denying knowing Steve Todd. The detectives asked if there was anyway in which Shawn Tenbrink’s activities could be monitored. Lt. Aponte said they monitored his phone calls and mail more closely.

Lt. Aponte said that to his recollection the MPD detective listened to the recorded telephone conversation. Lt. Aponte is 99% positive he made a separate recording onto a cassette tape of the telephone conversation between Shawn and Adam. He did this thinking it would be important at some date. Lt. Aponte does not recall if the detective took a copy of the tape or at a later date received a copy of the taped telephone conversation. Lt. Aponte said that at the time this occurred, the investigations unit was in the old Administration Building. After Lt. Aponte left the Investigative Unit, the Administration Building was moved from a 10,000 square foot area to occupy a 3000 square foot area. In the process it has been difficult at times to locate things. Lt. Aponte said he kept a spiral notebook of calls he received which would have indicated the call from the detective, however he does not know what happened to it in the move.

Immediately following the interview with the MPD detective, Shawn went back to his housing unti and called his mother’s place to get in touch with Adam. His brother wasn’t home so Shawn talked to his mother. Lt. Aponte’s recollection of the recorded telephone call was that Shawn told his mother to tell Adam that the police just interviewed him and he was to keep his mouth shut because he doesn’t know who he is dealing with. Lt. Aponte said based on Shawn’s conversation with his mother it did not seem that Steve Todd, Shawn and Adam were friends. The telephone call lasted about 3-4 minutes about the same amount of time as when Shawn called Adam. Lt. Aponte said Shawn had little or no respect for his mother based on listening to the recorded telephone conversation.

Lt. Aponte stated this was the first time he came across Shawn Tenbrink and said Shawn kept to himself. Shawn did not appear to be a problem at Norco. Lt. Aponte said Shawn Tenbrink’s central file possibly could be accessed through CDC Legal Affairs.

[Beebee]

Originally Posted by hedidit

This from the one who has a site devoted to harassing Dan Horowitz by calling him a murderer. Slander much? We have a board moderator, you aren't it.

Marlene has been outted as the fraud she is. Keep up on facts, not lies. I know it is hard for you. Marlene spent an anormous amount of time fleecing money from her followers. She spent that money on herself. FACT! Also, she spent an anormous amount of time alerting the transcripts. If you had actually read them you'd know that. She is in hiding, fact. If you know where she is, do tell?

Okay. Your intent here is obvious to me.

I'll be back later. Besides I have a Horowitz article to work on.

[Wudge]

Given that the trial record proves the burglars lied and were across from the Petersons' home the morning that Laci was last seen, the State's failure to both disclose "Aponte" on a timely basis and protect "Aponte" related evidence will be a significant Brady material issue on appeal.

The amazing thing about the "Aponte" issue is that it has to compete with a ton of other issues that are also vying for the number one spot on appeal.

It is all but assurred that Scott will prevail in his appeal and a second trial will follow.

[Wudge]

Originally Posted by hedidit

No, that is another lie by you Wudge. It has already been proven to you that he will not win in appeals. Why do you ignore the truth and post only lies? Do you really think that if you keep posting "it", it will come true? You spend 24/7 repeating lie after lie. Why is it you haven't gotten up from your chair, walked out your front door and given anyone this info to anyone in hopes to fee Scott? It's been how long and you've yet to do that. Is it because you'll be laughed at? Proven wrong again face to face? You can't be serious to believe that what you post will free Scott. Someone is going to come along and have an "ah ha" moment? You sound like you have a few more braincells than the other NGs and I can't believe you waste your life on this DRISP. You end up on the losing end always. imo of course

Over 50+ years, 70% of the cases that I've placed on my list of likely wrongful convictions have been successfully appealed or otherwise were been favorably resolved/cured.

Taken singularly, the appeal issues in this case are far beyond strong. However, the issues will also be considered compounding and cumulative. In the syllabus that will sectionalize the trial error and Constitutional issues (CI), you can reasonably expect to find:

- Ineffective venue change, poisoned venue chosen

- Erroneous admission of evidence

- Admission of evidence wherein prejudicial effect exceeded probative value

- Admission of junk science

- Defective juror removal

- Insufficient evidence to support proof beyond a reasonable doubt (juror error/Court failure)

- Defective jury instructions

- Unauthorized juror experimentation (both jury error and Court error)

- Corruption and conspiracy with overt intention to deny Scott Peterson a fair trial

- Withholding of exculpatory evidence

- Destruction of exculpatory evidence

- Manufacturing and presenting of alleged inculpatory evidence via conspiracy between LE and the DA's office with the intent to defraud the Court and deny Scott Peterson a fair trial

- Post trial juror issues (denying Scott Peterson his Constitutional rights)

- Infirmed verdict

Beyond trial error/CI

- Newly discovered evidence (Aponte)

- IAC

Net, given the number and strength of the CI/trial issues and given that upon judicial review, the 9th Circuit Court historically resolves 50% of capital case appeals for the appellant, a second trial is next to certain.

[Beebee]

Originally Posted by Wudge

Over 50+ years, 70% of the cases that I've placed on my list of likely wrongful convictions have been successfully appealed or otherwise were been favorably resolved/cured.


Net, given the number and strength of the CI/trial issues and given that upon judicial review, the 9th Circuit Court historically resolves 50% of capital case appeals for the appellant, a second trial is next to certain.

snip for space only

Great post Wudge. I agree, a second trial is next to certain.... but with not a speck of evidence, how will the State proceed? You can bet that the Peterson camp will be MORE than prepared, and they do not have to produce the real killer to exonerate Scott.

[Wudge]

Originally Posted by Beebee

snip for space only

Great post Wudge. I agree, a second trial is next to certain.... but with not a speck of evidence, how will the State proceed? You can bet that the Peterson camp will be MORE than prepared, and they do not have to produce the real killer to exonerate Scott.

A second trial would represent a much more difficult challenge for the State. The level of media demonization will certainly be less than what took place leading up to the first trial. And if Dr. Sheppard's trial is indicative of media changing course, you can expect more media reports that play up whether Scott was wrongfully convicted.

Further, it is likely that some, if not much, of the State's alleged evidence will not be allowed or brought up by the State in a second trial.

A trace element analyses comparing cement particulates between the concrete anchor and the concrete along the driveway edge would provide proof that they match. So the inferential basis for arguing alleged mythical anchors would be gone.

Additionally, Eloise Anderson was brutally impeached by Geragos. She would not returned to the witness stand. So dog evidence would be nill in a second trial.

Etc., etc.

All things considered, the State would have far less to build upon in a second trial. And they had little that was probative in the first trial.

Moreover, feel assurred that the defense's case-in-chief would be stronger and greatly expanded upon in a second trial.

Nevertheless, the critical factor in a second trial would remain voir dire, which obviously cannot be assessed at this time other than to say that the defense will want to seat more highly educated and/or younger males.

[Beebee]

Originally Posted by Wudge

Nevertheless, the critical factor in a second trial would remain voir dire, which obviously cannot be assessed at this time other than to say that the defense will want to seat more highly educated and/or younger males.

snip for space.

Getting highly educated people on juries seems to be a problem, and I think it really needs to be addressed. I hate to say it but most highly educated people aren't willing to serve and find ways to get out of jury duty.

I pulled this off CCADP but it's worth consideration:

... But even if you set aside the issue of the quality of the representation and the low standards for court-appointed lawyers, there’s the juries to consider. A few years ago, many states started moving away from selecting potential jurors based on voter registrations and instead moved to a system of selection based on driver’s licenses. And what a difference that made to the quality of the jury pool. Needless to say, there’s a tremendous difference in the education and intelligence of the average driver’s license holder vs. the average registered voter. Felons who can’t register to vote can now appear on juries. People who aren’t informed enough to have enough of an opinion to cast a ballot now appear on juries. Ask lawyers who’ve been in practice long enough to witness the change and they’ll tell you that the quality of the average jury plummeted. ...

[attorneywan2be]

Originally Posted by Wudge

[b]
These multiple impeachments of the burglars’ storyline are proof-positive that the burglary took place on 12/24 instead of on 12/26 as the burglars claim. And if the burglars lied about the 12/26 date, it clearly gives support to Lieutenant Aponte’s reporting that he heard a conversation that said an inmate, Steven Todd, had threatened Laci.

Finally, in his closing argument, Distaso never claimed that the burglary took place on 12/26, never.

Given their criminal history, the burglars should not only be considered alternative suspects but prime suspects, for they would have had means, motive and opportunity.

EXACTLY!!!

[Wudge]

Originally Posted by Beebee

snip for space.

Getting highly educated people on juries seems to be a problem, and I think it really needs to be addressed. I hate to say it but most highly educated people aren't willing to serve and find ways to get out of jury duty.

I pulled this off CCADP but it's worth consideration:

... But even if you set aside the issue of the quality of the representation and the low standards for court-appointed lawyers, there’s the juries to consider. A few years ago, many states started moving away from selecting potential jurors based on voter registrations and instead moved to a system of selection based on driver’s licenses. And what a difference that made to the quality of the jury pool. Needless to say, there’s a tremendous difference in the education and intelligence of the average driver’s license holder vs. the average registered voter. Felons who can’t register to vote can now appear on juries. People who aren’t informed enough to have enough of an opinion to cast a ballot now appear on juries. Ask lawyers who’ve been in practice long enough to witness the change and they’ll tell you that the quality of the average jury plummeted. ...

That is sadly true.

To properly assess circumstantial evidence and develop valid and/or true and/or reliable conclusions, jurors need to possess excellent capabilities in predicative/classical logic. This is a major reason I have long advocated the need for professional jurors. Though I would also accept removing from the potential voir dire pool any juror who did not sgrade 80 or more on an applied logic test.

[thinkaboutit]

Originally Posted by hedidit

Over 50+ years, 70% of the cases that I've placed on my list of likely wrongful convictions have been successfully appealed or otherwise were been favorably resolved/cured.

:lol: Stop joking, my sides are killing me.

Is that you N. Morrison? Does NY head quarters know how you are wasting their money by paying you? I don't think they hired you to spend every waking hour on DRISP by posting pure lies, do you? What about all those other so called "innocent, but very guilty" people on death row?

As a forum leader, "hedidit" I suggest you read the rules of this forum. If you'd like to stick around, you'll be expected to discuss the case in a respectful, civil manner. Your empty accusations are not welcome here. If you don't have anything of value to add to these discussions, which you haven't yet, you may want to move along.

[Wudge]

Originally Posted by hedidit

Is that you N. Morrison? Does NY head quarters know how you are wasting their money by paying you? I don't think they hired you to spend every waking hour on DRISP by posting pure lies, do you? What about all those other so called "innocent, but very guilty" people on death row?

I am neither female nor nearly as young as Nina. (chuckle) Though Yale is a fine institution.

Irrespective of my personnels, my post summing up the appeal issues is valid. They are numerous, substantial and cumulative.

[shirlley]

Originally Posted by thinkaboutit

As a forum leader, "hedidit" I suggest you read the rules of this forum. If you'd like to stick around, you'll be expected to discuss the case in a respectful, civil manner. Your empty accusations are not welcome here. If you don't have anything of value to add to these discussions, which you haven't yet, you may want to move along.

Thank you so much. I was hoping you would step in before it turned
into a bash the Petersons thread. I so want this forum to stay open.
Thanks again

[Beebee]

Originally Posted by Wudge

That is sadly true.

To properly assess circumstantial evidence and develop valid and/or true and/or reliable conclusions, jurors need to possess excellent capabilities in predicative/classical logic. This is a major reason I have long advocated the need for professional jurors. Though I would also accept removing from the potential voir dire pool any juror who did not sgrade 80 or more on an applied logic test.

I agree Wudge- no person should have less than capable people deciding their fate.
Professional jurors are a long way off-- as we both know prosecutors, aka the State-- like the jury system as it is. A nice first step though would be to at least let jurors do their own research during a case. Why not? If they go in not understanding something, isn't it better that they get up to speed than to make an uninformed decision?

I wish the jurors on the Peterson case could have taken a boat like Scott's to the Bay and tried to dump a weighted dummy.

[Wudge]

Originally Posted by Beebee

SNIP

A nice first step though would be to at least let jurors do their own research during a case. Why not? If they go in not understanding something, isn't it better that they get up to speed than to make an uninformed decision?

SNIP

In this case, the media put forth what could only be described as a massive pack of lies, falsehoods, myths and urban legends regarding Scott and the entire case. The entire jury pool was severely infected by this fact. Please understand that most people were just not astute to sort out fact from fiction.

The evidence available to jurors for their assessment does need to be filtered and controlled. What would assuredly happen otherwise would be (in some cases) the rendering of verdicts based on the jurors researching and accepting media lies/falsehoods/urban legends/myths, etc..

[Invrdv8]

Originally Posted by hedidit

What happenend to the woman who is claiming to be Scott's lover since he was 19 and she was 45? She's claiming to write a book, but changes her name and location every day. First he was innocent and now he is guilty. She's going to pay him back for denying he knows her.

You seem to have all the answers about everything. Why don't YOU know where this woman is? She "changes names and locations"? What's that supposed to mean? Where was it reported that she now feels Scott is guilty?
Just HOW is she going to "pay him back"? Sounds to me like you've been drinking way too much kool aid.

[Invrdv8]

Originally Posted by hedidit

Oh I forgot to add that she too is in hiding. Smells like MN, yes?

Well, look who's here! I had my suspicions and your comment here just confirmed them. The good thing is, IMO, you won't be here long.

[Anne2719]

Originally Posted by hedidit

Over 50+ years, 70% of the cases that I've placed on my list of likely wrongful convictions have been successfully appealed or otherwise were been favorably resolved/cured.

:lol: Stop joking, my sides are killing me.

Is that you N. Morrison? Does NY head quarters know how you are wasting their money by paying you? I don't think they hired you to spend every waking hour on DRISP by posting pure lies, do you? What about all those other so called "innocent, but very guilty" people on death row?

I've been reading along in this forum and discovering many interesting points I'd never considered before. The intelligent posters here have respectfully disputed some of the points, with facts, transcripts, and links to back up their arguments. I hope that you will do the same. So far I have seen only disrespect from you, which is not conducive to intelligent discussion.

[accordn2me]

Originally Posted by Beebee

I agree Wudge- no person should have less than capable people deciding their fate.
Professional jurors are a long way off-- as we both know prosecutors, aka the State-- like the jury system as it is. A nice first step though would be to at least let jurors do their own research during a case. Why not? If they go in not understanding something, isn't it better that they get up to speed than to make an uninformed decision?

Wouldn't the biased media poison them if they could do their own research? And if they could do their own research, what's to stop them from coming across some inadmissible information?

Originally Posted by Beebee

I wish the jurors on the Peterson case could have taken a boat like Scott's to the Bay and tried to dump a weighted dummy.

Didn't they do some experiment and it made a lot of people cry foul? I don't know which camp cried. Even naive me can see why experiments are irrelevant....

[One2Snoop]

Originally Posted by Beebee

I agree Wudge- no person should have less than capable people deciding their fate.
Professional jurors are a long way off-- as we both know prosecutors, aka the State-- like the jury system as it is. A nice first step though would be to at least let jurors do their own research during a case. Why not? If they go in not understanding something, isn't it better that they get up to speed than to make an uninformed decision?

I wish the jurors on the Peterson case could have taken a boat like Scott's to the Bay and tried to dump a weighted dummy.

I find your entire post offensive. Not only to future jurors but to the ones who presided over this case. Not everyone in this world can afford a college education. How do we even know you have one? You almost make it sound as though future jurors should major in a "Bachelor of Jury Duty". Sounds like a great scheme to make money - kind of like those online fake diploma's you can order. Oh thats right, Scott had some of those.

I honestly believe hands on experience, street smart, a worldly experience, or whatever you want to call it, far outweighs any book knowledge experience. I'm not saying book knowledge is useless, I'm sure it would be very helpful but not for an entire jury. There's no balance in the sort of system you suggest.

Lets try again. There's a perfectly good reason why the jury system is set up the way it is. If your life and soul where at the stake of a "professional jury", "professional testimony", yada, yada are you seriously telling me you'd be ok with that? I have a hard time believing any "sane person" would find that acceptable.

[accordn2me]

Originally Posted by thinkaboutit

One2Snoop why should we take what convicted felons say on their word? Which is exactly what MPD did. Todd said several things that were proven untrue. He said he saw mail in the Medina's mailbox - as Wudge said - it was undisputed that the only possible mail he could have seen in the Medina's mailbox was outgoing mail - which was gone by 10:50 a.m. on the 24th. He also said the Medina house looked empty because one car was gone. There was another parked in their driveway. How can one assume no one is home with a car in the driveway? Isn't it more likely that he saw the Medina's packing their other car up the morning of the 24th? He also told MPD that he had involved Pearce in the entire burglary - Pearce says no way - he only pulled up to the front of the house - the safe was already outside and Todd loaded it up and drove away. I'm sure you're familiar with the list of items Todd claims to have transported via his bicycle. A rolling tool box with tools in it that Susan Medina testified was too heavy for her husband to pick up, another 24-inch tool box full of tools, weedeater, electric saw, just to name a few. This burglary did not happen the way Todd claimed it did.

Are you familiar with the Aponte tip? The Tenbrink brothers were talking on the phone amongst themselves (or so they thought) about how Laci had interrupted Todd and Todd verbally threatened her. How can that be discounted? Even if Todd didn't have something to do with Laci's demise - the statement by Tenbrink that Todd saw Laci and vice versa - completely exonerates Scott.

Why were the Tenbrink brothers in jail...or one in jail? Did they have any prior convictions or were they merely first-time-accused offenders? Unless this was their first rodeo, and they didn't know anyone who'd ever spent any time behind bars, maybe they really did believe jailhouse conversations were truly private. They probably missed that recorded bit BeeBee told us about that stated in advance that conversations were "monitored." In any case I have to ask, why should we take what jailbirds say in a conversation they believed to be private as gospel? Why were they "privately" talking about Laci Peterson in the first place? And if the Aponte tip is so up-and-up, why did Aponte "rather it not be recorded?"

[accordn2me]

Originally Posted by Wudge

That is sadly true.

To properly assess circumstantial evidence and develop valid and/or true and/or reliable conclusions, jurors need to possess excellent capabilities in predicative/classical logic. This is a major reason I have long advocated the need for professional jurors. Though I would also accept removing from the potential voir dire pool any juror who did not sgrade 80 or more on an applied logic test.

That would probably remove me. What would the spelling, typing requirements be?

Let's fantasize about a "professional jury" pool. Would voir dire still be required?

[Beebee]

Originally Posted by One2Snoop

I find your entire post offensive. Not only to future jurors but to the ones who presided over this case. Not everyone in this world can afford a college education. How do we even know you have one? You almost make it sound as though future jurors should major in a "Bachelor of Jury Duty". Sounds like a great scheme to make money - kind of like those online fake diploma's you can order. Oh thats right, Scott had some of those.
snip

You are offended because I think capable people should sit on juries?

You are offended because I think people like Richelle Nice should not?

Okay. Be offended. I still stand by my opinion. The good news for you is it's not likely to change anytime soon. The bad news is wrongful convictions are an epidemic in this country. Hope you are never a victim.

MOO etc.

[enlightenme]

Originally Posted by Beebee

You are offended because I think capable people should sit on juries?

You are offended because I think people like Richelle Nice should not?

Okay. Be offended. I still stand by my opinion. The good news for you is it's not likely to change anytime soon. The bad news is wrongful convictions are an epidemic in this country. Hope you are never a victim.

MOO etc.

An epidemic? Please link to facts to support this!

What constitutes an "epidemic" anyway? What percentages? What "polls" and statistics?

[Beebee]

Originally Posted by enlightenme

An epidemic? Please link to facts to support this!

What constitutes an "epidemic" anyway? What percentages? What "polls" and statistics?

However, one’s perspective on the magnitude of the problem might change when one considers the overall volume of cases processed through the U.S. criminal justice system. For example, in the year 2000 there were 2.2 million arrests in the United States for index crimes alone. We also know that about 70 percent of those arrested for felonies are ultimately convicted of either a felony or a misdemeanor. This means that if we assume that the system was 99.5 percent accurate in those cases and made errors in only one-half of 1 percent (0.5 percent) of those convictions, that rate of error would have produced about 7,500 wrongful convictions among those 2.2 million arrested for index crimes. So a small error rate in a very large system can result in thousands of miscarriages of justice and allow many of the criminals who actually committed those crimes to remain free to victimize others.

The study by the way was so conservatively done, that annual number of 7,500 is just the tip of the ice-berg. Read the whole thing here:

http://www.abanet.org/crimjust/sprin...onviction.html

[thinkaboutit]

Originally Posted by accordn2me

Why were the Tenbrink brothers in jail...or one in jail? Did they have any prior convictions or were they merely first-time-accused offenders? Unless this was their first rodeo, and they didn't know anyone who'd ever spent any time behind bars, maybe they really did believe jailhouse conversations were truly private. They probably missed that recorded bit BeeBee told us about that stated in advance that conversations were "monitored." In any case I have to ask, why should we take what jailbirds say in a conversation they believed to be private as gospel? Why were they "privately" talking about Laci Peterson in the first place? And if the Aponte tip is so up-and-up, why did Aponte "rather it not be recorded?"

Let's compare apples to apples here. You are suggesting it's okay to take the burglars word when they tell the police they didn't do something. But we shouldn't take their word when a conversation is recorded between two brothers. Good point - let's say they knew the conversation was being recorded. Shouldn't you ask yourself why they wanted so badly to put the blame on Todd? Shouldn't you ask yourself why these guys were talking about Todd - then denied knowing him? Doesn't that suggest the Tenbrinks could have had something to do with Laci's disappearance? That still exonerates Scott.

I'm not sure what you are referring to when you say "why did Aponte 'rather it not be recorded'"? What didn't he want recorded? Are you suggesting that Aponte was lying? Why would he do that?

[thinkaboutit]

Originally Posted by Toggie

I realize police do make mistakes...after all they are human. Todd & Pearce were petty criminals. Todd was out looking for stuff to steal to buy his kids Christmas presents IIRC. Todd was on a bike. Todd had to go looking for Pearce in order for him to have a car to load up his stolen goods....I honestly don't think they were involved...The MPD cleared them but could never seem to get past Scott.

Yes Todd & Pearce were burglars. They were also drug addicts. The investigation the MPD did into this burglary was, to put it mildly, incomplete.

I find it much easier to believe that these people were responsible for Laci's demise - than Scott - who had no history of drug use, no criminal record, no history of violence (domestic or any other), no childhood behavior problems, no history of anger problems, etc., etc.