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]

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

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

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

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

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

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/notoriou...ly/list/1.html

[Anne2719]

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

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.

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

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

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

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.

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

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.

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

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.

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

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.

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

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.

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

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.

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

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.

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

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.

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

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.

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

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.

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

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.

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

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.

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

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

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

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.

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

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.

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

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

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

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

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

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

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

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

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

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

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

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

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

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

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

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.

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

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

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

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).

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

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.

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

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.

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

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.

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

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.

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

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.

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

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.

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

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]

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

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]

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

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]

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

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]

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

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]

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

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]

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

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]

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

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

DRISP just "winged it."

[Wearing A Halo]

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

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]

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

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]

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

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]

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

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]

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

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]

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

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]

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

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]

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

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]

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

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]

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

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]

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

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]

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

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]

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

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]

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

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]

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

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]

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

At what point have you made too many assumptions?

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

[Wearing A Halo]

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

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]

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

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]

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

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

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]

Originally Posted by 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.

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]

Originally Posted by Anne2719

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]

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

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

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"

[attorneywan2be]

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

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-...stRecentReview

[frydaddy]

Originally Posted by attorneywan2be

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-...stRecentReview

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.