The Croton Watch

[Cadillakin]

Would somebody explain what the deal is with that Croton watch? Scott was trying to sell that watch online, if not jointly with Laci, by himself. He was using his own email and Ebay accounts. Note the description on the link below, with Scott's obvious verbiage. Does anybody doubt that Scott wrote that? How is it that the NG's latched onto this as some kind of exonerating evidence or evidence of nefarious activities?

Did Scott tell somebody that the watch was missing? Or stolen by the kidnapper/burglars? After he had been trying to sell it and failed? (no sale on Ebay)

The brown van people, the Renfro's, pawned a crappy scratched croton watch for 20 bucks, while Scott was trying to get $750 for his/Laci's on Ebay.. Somebody suggests it's the same watch? Based on what evidence? I noticed when reading from the past that one of the NG's considered the Croton Watch the most important "exonerating evidence." Huh? How does it all tie together?

Link to ebay Croton watch sale... Use the zoom that your browser provides to enlarge the text, if needed.
http://i9.tinypic.com/6h3vihv.jpg

[TopGunner]

Originally Posted by Cadillakin

Would somebody explain what the deal is with that Croton watch? Scott was trying to sell that watch online, if not jointly with Laci, by himself. He was using his own email and Ebay accounts. Note the description on the link below, with Scott's obvious verbiage. Does anybody doubt that Scott wrote that? How is it that the NG's latched onto this as some kind of exonerating evidence or evidence of nefarious activities?

Did Scott tell somebody that the watch was missing? Or stolen by the kidnapper/burglars? After he had been trying to sell it and failed? (no sale on Ebay)

The brown van people, the Renfro's, pawned a crappy scratched croton watch for 20 bucks, while Scott was trying to get $750 for his/Laci's on Ebay.. Somebody suggests it's the same watch? Based on what evidence? I noticed when reading from the past that one of the NG's considered the Croton Watch the most important "exonerating evidence." Huh? How does it all tie together?

Link to ebay Croton watch sale... Use the zoom that your browser provides to enlarge the text, if needed.
http://i9.tinypic.com/6h3vihv.jpg

Hey Cadi - sure hope it's cooler on the west coast today then it is on the east, bleh.......

Anyhow, here's what the P's say on their site:

We are also offering a $5000 reward for specific information leading to the recovery of Laci's missing Croton watch. Laci is believed to have been wearing this watch the day she went missing. The watch is pictured in the flyer below.

I'm sure they have more about it over there, but anyway, I personally have no clue where they came up with the idea that Laci was wearing a broken watch the day she went missing. From all that I remember, the P's are the only one's floating that theory, and since the kidnappers took Laci home to change, I'm suspicious as to why they didn't take the rest of her jewelry which was out in the open and way more valuable that a non-working watch.

[Cadillakin]

Originally Posted by TopGunner

Hey Cadi - sure hope it's cooler on the west coast today then it is on the east, bleh.......

It's been consistenly 100 degrees or thereabouts in Modesto for the last month.. but we think that's pretty cool. Last year, we had 12 consecutive days of 112 or higher temperature.. I think we had nearly 50 die in ours and surrounding counties..

[Cadillakin]

Originally Posted by TopGunner

I'm sure they have more about it over there, but anyway, I personally have no clue where they came up with the idea that Laci was wearing a broken watch the day she went missing.

So, she put on her diamond earrings AND her broken croton watch to go walk the dog, without a jacket on when it was 40 degrees in Modesto.

I had to add that last part.. It was very cold in Modesto. Those who were insisting Laci walked forgot how cold it really was to be outside without a jacket. Both myself and Royal Purple, both residents here had comments about the weather. Scott himself said it was too cold to even golf.. And for sure, golfers are pretty devoted... and they will get out there unless the conditions are very adverse.

I really got a taste of the lengths to which the NG's would go as I suggested that nobody in their right mind, particularly a young woman carrying another life would be outside for a long walk when it was very cold, misting, and 8 degrees above freezing.. One of the NG's replied that when they were pregnant they used to walk around outside in their Tshirts when it was freezing because it was easy to overheat themselves carrying the extra weight... The first one that said that elicited similar comments from other NG's who thought that sounded plausible.. So, pretty soon the thread evolved to NG women asserting they loved to walk in the freezing weather when they were pregnant, with barely a stitch of clothing on. LOLOLOL.. What a bunch of nuts!!

[I'mSun]

Originally Posted by Cadillakin

It's been consistenly 100 degrees or thereabouts in Modesto for the last month.. but we think that's pretty cool. Last year, we had 12 consecutive days of 112 or higher temperature.. I think we had nearly 50 die in ours and surrounding counties..

Yep, last year our heat wave was terrible. Record highs everywhere including 114 degrees in Dublin. I remember a few of us posting the high temps at San Quentin. ISP in on the 4th tier with no a/c and no way to cool off. It must have been unbearable. What a shame.

[TopGunner]

Hi Cali & Sun, thanks for sharing last years misery, LOL. 4th tier, no air...I actually CAN imagine. Yesterday I took child to college. Child is on 3rd floor, all outdoor steps. Had to be around 100 with 100% humidity. We had 2 car loads to haul up and then groceries. I am half the size I was when I woke up yesterday.......

Back on topic: I hate the heat, LOVE the cold/snow. I assure you I never walked around outside when it was FREEZING without coat, shoes, etc. I may have been pregnant, but I was still human. Geez...

[Cadillakin]

Originally Posted by Cadillakin

I really got a taste of the lengths to which the NG's would go as I suggested that nobody in their right mind, particularly a young woman carrying another life would be outside for a long walk when it was very cold, misting, and 8 degrees above freezing.. !

I meant to append to that, "without a jacket"

[I'mSun]

Originally Posted by TopGunner

Hi Cali & Sun, thanks for sharing last years misery, LOL. 4th tier, no air...I actually CAN imagine. Yesterday I took child to college. Child is on 3rd floor, all outdoor steps. Had to be around 100 with 100% humidity. We had 2 car loads to haul up and then groceries. I am half the size I was when I woke up yesterday.......

Back on topic: I hate the heat, LOVE the cold/snow. I assure you I never walked around outside when it was FREEZING without coat, shoes, etc. I may have been pregnant, but I was still human. Geez...

I sure don't envy you, TG, making several trips up the stairs in that heat and humidity. The heat is one thing, but together with humidity, it is awful! I dislike the heat, too. When it is cold, we can put on a sweater or jacket to stay warm. Now, I have 5 children, which means I've been pregnant 5 times. I assure you that never once did I go for a walk in 40, or even 50, degree weather without a jacket. Nope, not even once.

[Cadillakin]

Originally Posted by I'mSun

Now, I have 5 children, which means I've been pregnant 5 times. I assure you that never once did I go for a walk in 40, or even 50, degree weather without a jacket. Nope, not even once.

Right, and that made those of us who followed the drama in real time, within the Modesto environment, very skeptical that any of the descriptions of Laci with black pants and white top, sans jacket, were accurate.

Everything about every story Scott told stunk. His fishing story the first day as well as Laci's description that morning for her "walk", right on thru to the last time he publicly opened his mouth. Men should not tell tall tales when their wives have just been murdered.. Juries take it as a certain sign of guilt. As they should...

[Lavindar]

Originally Posted by Cadillakin

So, she put on her diamond earrings AND her broken croton watch to go walk the dog, without a jacket on when it was 40 degrees in Modesto.

I had to add that last part.. It was very cold in Modesto. Those who were insisting Laci walked forgot how cold it really was to be outside without a jacket. Both myself and Royal Purple, both residents here had comments about the weather. Scott himself said it was too cold to even golf.. And for sure, golfers are pretty devoted... and they will get out there unless the conditions are very adverse.

I really got a taste of the lengths to which the NG's would go as I suggested that nobody in their right mind, particularly a young woman carrying another life would be outside for a long walk when it was very cold, misting, and 8 degrees above freezing.. One of the NG's replied that when they were pregnant they used to walk around outside in their Tshirts when it was freezing because it was easy to overheat themselves carrying the extra weight... The first one that said that elicited similar comments from other NG's who thought that sounded plausible.. So, pretty soon the thread evolved to NG women asserting they loved to walk in the freezing weather when they were pregnant, with barely a stitch of clothing on. LOLOLOL.. What a bunch of nuts!!

I'll third that VERY COLD statement. I was working that day and it was VERY VERY cold. To think that ANYONE would venture out without a coat on is ludicrous.

I want to ad my comment about the watch fiasco. I do not believe that Deanna Renfro (who pawned the watch) was related to Donnie and Mary Ann Renfrow. Renfro was Deanna's married name and, although their last names sound and even look alike, I believe they are no more related than Bruce Peterson is to Scott Peterson.

[Lavindar]

Originally Posted by Cadillakin

Would somebody explain what the deal is with that Croton watch? Scott was trying to sell that watch online, if not jointly with Laci, by himself. He was using his own email and Ebay accounts. Note the description on the link below, with Scott's obvious verbiage. Does anybody doubt that Scott wrote that? How is it that the NG's latched onto this as some kind of exonerating evidence or evidence of nefarious activities?

Did Scott tell somebody that the watch was missing? Or stolen by the kidnapper/burglars? After he had been trying to sell it and failed? (no sale on Ebay)

The brown van people, the Renfro's, pawned a crappy scratched croton watch for 20 bucks, while Scott was trying to get $750 for his/Laci's on Ebay.. Somebody suggests it's the same watch? Based on what evidence? I noticed when reading from the past that one of the NG's considered the Croton Watch the most important "exonerating evidence." Huh? How does it all tie together?

Link to ebay Croton watch sale... Use the zoom that your browser provides to enlarge the text, if needed.
http://i9.tinypic.com/6h3vihv.jpg

Amazing watch, Amazing Laci. The guy needs some vocabularly help.

[Cadillakin]

Originally Posted by Lavindar

I believe they are no more related than Bruce Peterson is to Scott Peterson.

That figures..

[Lili007]

Originally Posted by Cadillakin

So, she put on her diamond earrings AND her broken croton watch to go walk the dog, without a jacket on when it was 40 degrees in Modesto.

I had to add that last part.. It was very cold in Modesto. Those who were insisting Laci walked forgot how cold it really was to be outside without a jacket. Both myself and Royal Purple, both residents here had comments about the weather. Scott himself said it was too cold to even golf.. And for sure, golfers are pretty devoted... and they will get out there unless the conditions are very adverse.

I really got a taste of the lengths to which the NG's would go as I suggested that nobody in their right mind, particularly a young woman carrying another life would be outside for a long walk when it was very cold, misting, and 8 degrees above freezing.. One of the NG's replied that when they were pregnant they used to walk around outside in their Tshirts when it was freezing because it was easy to overheat themselves carrying the extra weight... The first one that said that elicited similar comments from other NG's who thought that sounded plausible.. So, pretty soon the thread evolved to NG women asserting they loved to walk in the freezing weather when they were pregnant, with barely a stitch of clothing on. LOLOLOL.. What a bunch of nuts!!

If I could vote for this post, it would be tops. So astute, so simple and so right.

IMO, of course.

[Trixy]

Originally Posted by Cadillakin

So, she put on her diamond earrings AND her broken croton watch to go walk the dog, without a jacket on when it was 40 degrees in Modesto.

I had to add that last part.. It was very cold in Modesto. Those who were insisting Laci walked forgot how cold it really was to be outside without a jacket. Both myself and Royal Purple, both residents here had comments about the weather. Scott himself said it was too cold to even golf.. And for sure, golfers are pretty devoted... and they will get out there unless the conditions are very adverse.

I really got a taste of the lengths to which the NG's would go as I suggested that nobody in their right mind, particularly a young woman carrying another life would be outside for a long walk when it was very cold, misting, and 8 degrees above freezing.. One of the NG's replied that when they were pregnant they used to walk around outside in their Tshirts when it was freezing because it was easy to overheat themselves carrying the extra weight... The first one that said that elicited similar comments from other NG's who thought that sounded plausible.. So, pretty soon the thread evolved to NG women asserting they loved to walk in the freezing weather when they were pregnant, with barely a stitch of clothing on. LOLOLOL.. What a bunch of nuts!!

:lol: Just goes to show you the depths they'll go to excuse Scott.

[deputydi]

Originally Posted by Cadillakin

<snip> . . . without a jacket on when it was 40 degrees in Modesto.
<snip>
I really got a taste of the lengths to which the NG's would go as I suggested that nobody in their right mind, particularly a young woman carrying another life would be outside for a long walk when it was very cold, misting, and 8 degrees above freezing.. One of the NG's replied that when they were pregnant they used to walk around outside in their Tshirts when it was freezing because it was easy to overheat themselves carrying the extra weight... The first one that said that elicited similar comments from other NG's who thought that sounded plausible.. So, pretty soon the thread evolved to NG women asserting they loved to walk in the freezing weather when they were pregnant, with barely a stitch of clothing on. LOLOLOL.. What a bunch of nuts!!

Don't you love tripping down memory lane? It's great having someone here who actually lives in Modesto and can bring some reality into the conversation.

I don't remember that particular conversation, but I do remember being told 40 degress in Modesto, CA is not the same as 40 degrees in Pgh, PA. I never did understand that logic. As far as I'm concerned 40 degrees is darned cold no matter where you are.

[deputydi]

Originally Posted by Cadillakin

Would somebody explain what the deal is with that Croton watch? Scott was trying to sell that watch online, if not jointly with Laci, by himself. He was using his own email and Ebay accounts. Note the description on the link below, with Scott's obvious verbiage. Does anybody doubt that Scott wrote that? How is it that the NG's latched onto this as some kind of exonerating evidence or evidence of nefarious activities?
<snip>http://i9.tinypic.com/6h3vihv.jpg

I'm with you. I would like one of the NGs to return long enough to explain the significance of the watch.

Who said the watch was broken? The ebay listing says "excellent condition" and I couldn't find anything that indicates the watch wasn't running. Isn't that a material fact that would have to be disclosed?

The ebay auction began on Dec 8 (one day before the boat purchase and one day before he told Amber he had "lost" his wife). The auction ended 9 days before Laci "disappeared". I don't know (and I'm not going to speculate) what happened to the watch, but IMO his plan was forming then. Coincidence??? The NGs will claim it is, but in Distaso's words "how many do we have to accept . . . .".

[Cadillakin]

Originally Posted by deputydi

I'm with you. I would like one of the NGs to return long enough to explain the significance of the watch.

Oh hell, they don't know anything.. It's all talking points. First Geragos, Jackie, Lee, or Marlene, invents something.. Then they pass it off to their supporters.. and one by one, they spew it out.

A perfect example of that was the phantom sonogram People Magazine reported. People disclosed that Laci had a sonogram on Dec 23, 2002. Comparing the results of that imaginary sonogram with Conner's increased size when found on the shoreline, speculation began that Conner lived at least 6 weeks after Laci's disappearance. I vividly recall Lee Peterson as he stood front and center before the cameras and stated unequivocally that Scott was innocent because Conner lived for 6 weeks after Laci disappeared. (You can see references to this "6 week theory" many places. In fact, it's here in these forums, at least one time, probably more on the SII: Evidence that Points to Scott's Innocent Thread, Part 1, the first posting) Though it was known soon after the publishing that the reported sonogram of Dec 23rd was fiction, as the doctors involved publicly refuted the reporting, the NG's never let that theory go. They just modified, rationalized, and denied, and that fictional story became the basis for one of the more prevalent "Scott is innocent" themes.

In fact, Peterson and Geragos hired a guy, Dr. March, to basically flesh out the lie into so-called scientific fact. But unfortunately for them, nobody believed what he was saying except the Peterson's and NG's who had invented and furthered the theme.

[enlightenme]

Originally Posted by Cadillakin

Oh hell, they don't know anything.. It's all talking points. First Geragos, Jackie, Lee, or Marlene, invents something.. Then they pass it off to their supporters.. and one by one, they spew it out.

A perfect example of that was the phantom sonogram People Magazine reported. People disclosed that Laci had a sonogram on Dec 23, 2002. Comparing the results of that imaginary sonogram with Conner's increased size when found on the shoreline, speculation began that Conner lived at least 6 weeks after Laci's disappearance. I vividly recall Lee Peterson as he stood front and center before the cameras and stated unequivocally that Scott was innocent because Conner lived for 6 weeks after Laci disappeared. (You can see references to this "6 week theory" many places. In fact, it's here in these forums, at least one time, probably more on the SII: Evidence that Points to Scott's Innocent Thread, Part 1, the first posting) Though it was known soon after the publishing that the reported sonogram of Dec 23rd was fiction, as the doctors involved publicly refuted the reporting, the NG's never let that theory go. They just modified, rationalized, and denied, and that fictional story became the basis for one of the more prevalent "Scott is innocent" themes.

In fact, Peterson and Geragos hired a guy, Dr. March, to basically flesh out the lie into so-called scientific fact. But unfortunately for them, nobody believed what he was saying except the Peterson's and NG's who had invented and furthered the theme.

Dr. March was only trying to extend Conner's age (and date of death) by FOUR days.

There was also a rumor floated that Kim McGregor stole the sonogram pic during her break-in.

[sonoma]

Im not trying to be sarcastic or anything but I couldnt remember this? How did they determine that Laci was "not" wearing a jacket that day? is it because someone verified that nothing was missing? just wondering because my husband has no idea which jackets/sweatshirts shoes, etc I have (I do that because I have a tendancy to buy too many!) so if my husband had to look in our closet and let police know what was missing he would have no idea. I just wondered because I agree that I cant see her going out without a jacket in that weather I just dont remember how they felt like she "didnt have one when she left" same with shoes etc. I have stuff buried in my closet on purpose.

[Cadillakin]

Originally Posted by sonoma

Im not trying to be sarcastic or anything but I couldnt remember this? How did they determine that Laci was "not" wearing a jacket that day? is it because someone verified that nothing was missing? just wondering because my husband has no idea which jackets/sweatshirts shoes, etc I have (I do that because I have a tendancy to buy too many!) so if my husband had to look in our closet and let police know what was missing he would have no idea. I just wondered because I agree that I cant see her going out without a jacket in that weather I just dont remember how they felt like she "didnt have one when she left" same with shoes etc. I have stuff buried in my closet on purpose.

Laci never went anywhere, with jacket or without, but yours is a good question. In testimony, at least two parties asked Scott about Laci wearing a jacket. Scott of course, acted like it didn't really matter... (Read below) Also, I believe Amy was the one who knew Laci's wardrobe and habits the best. I know she was called upon to see if the clothes Laci wore the previous night, before she disappeared, while accompanying Scott while he got his haircut, were still in the house. The tan pants were gone of course.. and the blouse I believe was stuffed into the hamper. The police may have asked Amy about the jackets Laci wore, as well.

Brocchini asking Scott about the jacket she might have worn;

BROCCHINI: Did you notice what jack—her jacket was there, ‘cause if she went, like if she went walk—walkin’ at 10 o’clock or 9:30…PETERSON: She usually steals my stuff.
BROCCHINI: She uses your stuff?
PETERSON: Yeah because you know …
BROCCHINI: Um hum.
PETERSON: Instead of maternity stuff, so I don’t really know.
BROCCHINI: You don’t know
PETERSON: What type though? She could have had hers or mine or nothing, I don’t know.

Gwen Kemple addressing Scott... and testifying about it..


Rick Distaso: And how are normal, you know, December days in Modesto?
Gwen Kemple: I believe it was like in the 30s,
Rick Distaso: Okay.
Gwen Kemple: 40s.
Rick Distaso: And did you ask him anything about Laci wearing a jacket?
Gwen Kemple: I said, "Did she have on a jacket?" It was cold. I said, "Did she have on a jacket?" And he said, "I don't know.
I said, "Did you see if her jacket was missing?" And he said "No."
Rick Distaso: What was his demeanor during the times that you were having these conversations with him?
Gwen Kemple: Well, he wouldn't look at me. He just answered my questions calmly, just matter of fact.

That's all I know to answer your question... But as I recall, while living in the Modesto environment, a jacket was never mentioned by the "witnesses" or those who were asking us to keep an eye out for her.

Scott seems real concerned doesn't he? Even I know that my wife only has two likely jackets to wear in the cold.. I could search for those.. ask my daughters to help... Id ask her friends to see if maybe I overlooked something.. But Scott, he just doesn't give a sh*t.

[sonoma]

thank you for your quick response. I do understand that usually you'd think that someone would know which jackets were missing and Im not trying to excuse his behavior etc but honestly, when I was pregnant I grabbed many of my husbands jackets/sweatshirts because they fit better (before I got pregnant I was a size 5!) and honestly he wouldnt even know out of all teh stuff he has which one I took?? he has some clothes there sweaters and jackets included that he hasnt actually worn in years. He would never even be able to list his own stuff let alone mine. To be honest even my close friends and family members would not be able to tell you what jackets I have. there are just to many overall. Same with jewelry, my husband wouldnt have a clue. After this case I thought about if this were me and my husband was in the same situation as Scott (again Im not trying to excuse him or anything, Im just thinking...) there are alot of things my husband would absoultely "not" due but some of the things like coming home and not worrying etc he would have assumed as well, that I was at my grandmothers house etc and would not panic. He is one to think nothing happens and doesnt worry alot of course that would change if I was missing but initially if he came home and found everything dark etc, pregnant or not. He just doesnt worry about stuff and as far as emotions? he could be totally upset inside and the way he is, he would not be panicking and blubbering and it could be misconstrued as not caring. The cheating????? heck no! Alot of people though would think him "uncaring" by his outward emotions. You would never know his pain by looking at him. course the lying??? another story!

[Wearing A Halo]

Originally Posted by sonoma

Im not trying to be sarcastic or anything but I couldnt remember this? How did they determine that Laci was "not" wearing a jacket that day? is it because someone verified that nothing was missing? just wondering because my husband has no idea which jackets/sweatshirts shoes, etc I have (I do that because I have a tendancy to buy too many!) so if my husband had to look in our closet and let police know what was missing he would have no idea. I just wondered because I agree that I cant see her going out without a jacket in that weather I just dont remember how they felt like she "didnt have one when she left" same with shoes etc. I have stuff buried in my closet on purpose.

DRISP said that Laci could have been wearing a jacket she stole from him (cause she would always steal from him), or one of her own or simply not wearing a jacket at all.

[Lavindar]

Originally Posted by Cadillakin

Oh hell, they don't know anything.. It's all talking points. First Geragos, Jackie, Lee, or Marlene, invents something.. Then they pass it off to their supporters.. and one by one, they spew it out.

A perfect example of that was the phantom sonogram People Magazine reported. People disclosed that Laci had a sonogram on Dec 23, 2002. Comparing the results of that imaginary sonogram with Conner's increased size when found on the shoreline, speculation began that Conner lived at least 6 weeks after Laci's disappearance. I vividly recall Lee Peterson as he stood front and center before the cameras and stated unequivocally that Scott was innocent because Conner lived for 6 weeks after Laci disappeared. (You can see references to this "6 week theory" many places. In fact, it's here in these forums, at least one time, probably more on the SII: Evidence that Points to Scott's Innocent Thread, Part 1, the first posting) Though it was known soon after the publishing that the reported sonogram of Dec 23rd was fiction, as the doctors involved publicly refuted the reporting, the NG's never let that theory go. They just modified, rationalized, and denied, and that fictional story became the basis for one of the more prevalent "Scott is innocent" themes.

In fact, Peterson and Geragos hired a guy, Dr. March, to basically flesh out the lie into so-called scientific fact. But unfortunately for them, nobody believed what he was saying except the Peterson's and NG's who had invented and furthered the theme.

Did the sonogram on the 23rd first come out in People Magazine. That irritated the hell out of me. More media manipulation by Garegos the Liar.

What made Dr. March so ridiculous (in addition to "cut me some slack" was the fact that he did not have a speciality of fetal age or anthropology in his background. He put down what Dr. Devore said, but then admitted that he recommended people to Dr. Devore. He's a stupid stupid man and hopefully he damaged his career with his comments. Talk about PAID experts.

[Lavindar]

Originally Posted by Cadillakin

That figures..

Makes you wonder how long Geragos had to look for a Renfro with a record and a croton watch to pawn.

[Cadillakin]

Originally Posted by enlightenme

Dr. March was only trying to extend Conner's age (and date of death) by FOUR days.

Yeah, but I wasn't trying to suggest March said that Conner lived 6 weeks after Laci died.. only that he was hired to further the "Conner lived after Laci died" theory. The first was when the policeman who discovered Conner suggested he was a full grown baby boy.. The second was when Dr Peterson suggested that the baby might have been a live birth. The third was when People published that phony story on the sonogram. That really gave the story impetus because it was being discussed on National TV by respected analysts...

And last but not least.. The 4th was March.

He only had to extend Conner's life one day for Scott to get a pass, but for some reason, as you said, he suggested Conner lived for four days. The 6weeks of the People Magazine story was too long to try in the courtroom, Ridiculous really.. while one day might have seemed not enough to convince the jury of anything meaningful.. so I guess he and Geragos decided Conner living 4 days was worth a shot.

It's all the same theory, just different principals and circumstances..

[sonoma]

re: the watch, wasnt the location of the pawn shop close to the Peterson neighborhood and wasnt it close to the time after she went missing. Having the name Renfro, pawning a Croton Watch close to the time and place is awfully coincidental?? even if Geragos was looking for one to bring up possible questions. The odds of that are pretty slim to find all of that? and as far as the value of the watch Laci had being way more than what this watch was pawned for means nothing to someone who is desparate for cash. Unfortunately I have family members who pawned expensive items for nearly no cash just because they needed it for drugs etc. Sad but it happens all the time. Value means nothing at that point. You just want the money and you dont think real hard when it comes to gee, they might be able to trace this to that woman??? People who are desparate dont think about stuff like that. They are living for the moment.

[TopGunner]

Originally Posted by sonoma

re: the watch, wasnt the location of the pawn shop close to the Peterson neighborhood and wasnt it close to the time after she went missing. Having the name Renfro, pawning a Croton Watch close to the time and place is awfully coincidental?? even if Geragos was looking for one to bring up possible questions. The odds of that are pretty slim to find all of that? and as far as the value of the watch Laci had being way more than what this watch was pawned for means nothing to someone who is desparate for cash. Unfortunately I have family members who pawned expensive items for nearly no cash just because they needed it for drugs etc. Sad but it happens all the time. Value means nothing at that point. You just want the money and you dont think real hard when it comes to gee, they might be able to trace this to that woman??? People who are desparate dont think about stuff like that. They are living for the moment.

Hi Sonoma, you certainly to have a lot of real life examples to explain ISP behavior/innocence. Fortunately, I have none.

What are the odds of Renfro pawing a croton watch a few days after Laci disappeared? Considering it was never identified as her watch, only "similar", I'd say there's no chance it happened. I find it interesting that we could fill full threads with many pages of all the *coincidences* that pointed to ISP guilt, but no one outside of him can have a single coincidence. Very interesting actually.

[Lavindar]

Originally Posted by TopGunner

Hi Sonoma, you certainly to have a lot of real life examples to explain ISP behavior/innocence. Fortunately, I have none.

What are the odds of Renfro pawing a croton watch a few days after Laci disappeared? Considering it was never identified as her watch, only "similar", I'd say there's no chance it happened. I find it interesting that we could fill full threads with many pages of all the *coincidences* that pointed to ISP guilt, but no one outside of him can have a single coincidence. Very interesting actually.

Croton makes a vast array of watches. The pawn shop is in the same general area of the Peterson house - on the east side, but then I believe Renfro lived in Empire (which is east of Modesto) so that pawn shop would be the logical one to use.

I believe the watch was reclaimed within a few days. Guess she didn't really need to pawn it. Given the description of the watch on the EBAY -- top of the line - I seriously doubt that it was Laci's watch. The Petersons obviously don't think so.

The only similarity to Laci's watch was that it was made by Croton.

[One2Snoop]

Originally Posted by TopGunner

Hi Sonoma, you certainly to have a lot of real life examples to explain ISP behavior/innocence. Fortunately, I have none.

What are the odds of Renfro pawing a croton watch a few days after Laci disappeared? Considering it was never identified as her watch, only "similar", I'd say there's no chance it happened. I find it interesting that we could fill full threads with many pages of all the *coincidences* that pointed to ISP guilt, but no one outside of him can have a single coincidence. Very interesting actually.

Hey, I tried to start a thread like that. It got shot down faster than a person can blink. Maybe someone else can start one. They might have more success with it than I did.

And FWIW, I agree TG.

[TopGunner]

Originally Posted by One2Snoop

Hey, I tried to start a thread like that. It got shot down faster than a person can blink. Maybe someone else can start one. They might have more success with it than I did.

And FWIW, I agree TG.

What got shot down Snoops, a thread with all the *coincidences* pointing to ISP guilt? I would think that would be a very interesting/active thread. Maybe it just got burried before too many people saw it. Try again.

[One2Snoop]

Originally Posted by TopGunner

What got shot down Snoops, a thread with all the *coincidences* pointing to ISP guilt? I would think that would be a very interesting/active thread. Maybe it just got burried before too many people saw it. Try again.

Nope it got deleted. No one could agree on his coincidences. I don't know why?

[TopGunner]

Originally Posted by One2Snoop

Nope it got deleted. No one could agree on his coincidences. I don't know why?

LOL, got it Snoops. I guess to us, connect the conincidences and it's so obvious what happened. The NG's, however, will isolate each event......it doesn't jive.

[enlightenme]

Originally Posted by Lavindar

Croton makes a vast array of watches. The pawn shop is in the same general area of the Peterson house - on the east side, but then I believe Renfro lived in Empire (which is east of Modesto) so that pawn shop would be the logical one to use.

I believe the watch was reclaimed within a few days. Guess she didn't really need to pawn it. Given the description of the watch on the EBAY -- top of the line - I seriously doubt that it was Laci's watch. The Petersons obviously don't think so.

The only similarity to Laci's watch was that it was made by Croton.

Geragos already KNEW it wasn't Laci's watch, that's why he waved around a pawn shop receipt instead of calling witnesses. He was just trying to create any kind of doubt he could but none of it was reasonable doubt.

[Wearing A Halo]

Kudos to those who can identify whom, following the conviction of DRISP, stated, "It kind of put my faith back into the American justice system."

[Lavindar]

Originally Posted by Wearing A Halo

Kudos to those who can identify whom, following the conviction of DRISP, stated, "It kind of put my faith back into the American justice system."

Moi!!!!!!!!!!! roflmao

[deputydi]

Originally Posted by sonoma

thank you for your quick response. I do understand that usually you'd think that someone would know which jackets were missing and Im not trying to excuse his behavior etc but honestly, when I was pregnant I grabbed many of my husbands jackets/sweatshirts because they fit better (before I got pregnant I was a size 5!) and honestly he wouldnt even know out of all teh stuff he has which one I took?? <snip>

Cadi's response to this post was perfect, but I'd like to add something. If Laci was wearing a jacket (her own or Scott's) this would PROVE each and every one of the eyewitnesses was mistaken. NOT ONE described her wearing a jacket. If she wasn't wearing a jacket, it defies common sense. No one (pregnant or not) is going to take the dog for a walk to the park wearing just a white blouse and black pants in 40 degree weather. We all know these weren't the clothes she was found in 4 months later. So, to me, that means we either must believe the kidnappers took her home to change or Scott was mistaken about the clothes she was wearing that morning. If he wasn't sure what she was wearing, why didn't he simply say "I can't remember" instead of giving the detailed information that was on the poster? If he was too distraught that night to think straight, why didn't he change the description the next day -- the next week -- anytime?

I could go on and on but I'm at work. I ask you, given the choices, which make the most sense? Which are the most believable? Which are the REASONABLE conclusions?

[TopGunner]

Originally Posted by onthefence

This post makes you look bad.....really. It's uncalled for. Is the purpose of the board to discuss the case-all viewpoints, or not? why all the unprovoked snide remarks, calling people that have different ideas than you, "nuts", etc? or is this stuff the only thing some posters can still rally around together? Too bad it is what the discussion is ultimately reduced to.

OTF, I believe it is you who provokes. If you were interested in this thread, you'd be posting about the watch, not looking for someone who made an example (a good one I might add), that doesn't suit YOU. I also believe that if you posted here more often, not just to bring people you don't know to task, you'd get to know the posters and how they explain things...therefore, you wouldn't be so quick to judge.

Now, do you have an OPINION about the watch?

[onthefence]

Originally Posted by TopGunner

OTF, I believe it is you who provokes. If you were interested in this thread, you'd be posting about the watch, not looking for someone who made an example (a good one I might add), that doesn't suit YOU. I also believe that if you posted here more often, not just to bring people you don't know to task, you'd get to know the posters and how they explain things...therefore, you wouldn't be so quick to judge.

Now, do you have an OPINION about the watch?

I don't have to get to know someone to know that snide remarks and personal attacks such as the one I was referring to are unneccessary and uncalled for. If that provokes someone, then I don't know what to say about that.

I did not know about the Croton watch. Based on what is on this thread it seems as an unlikely coincidence as many of the others I've read here-that a Croton watch was pawned close to the time of this crime. They are not rare, but they are also not common. Would be interesting to know how often the Modesto pawnbroker receives Croton watch to be pawned? How many per year, per month? Those are questions both sides could have asked, imo. If it is a pretty common watch, then maybe this one isn't as big a coincidence. If they get one or two a year, then it seems a pretty BIG coincidence that they recieved one shortly after this crime.

A few have mentioned the location of the pawn in relation to the PEterson home as an indicator of whether or not the watch belonged to them/Lacii.e. Imo, if the watch was stolen from Laci or the Peterson home, it was probably not pawned by the person that did the stealing (unless they were mentally retarded). Imo, it would have been taken to a "fence", then sold or traded for drugs,to someone who had no idea whose watch or under what circumstances it was stolen and then pawned it wherever-fastest cash.

That is was pawned for $20 also doesn't mean it wasn't the Peterson watch that listed (not SOLD) on ebay for $700. A watch that is obtained by the means this one was, isn't going to shop it around to their friends or on ebay or shop around for the best price, they are going to take it and get what they can get in cash as fast as they can. It is too bad the watch was claimed, because now we will probably never know.

Based on what i have read here, so far it is a pretty big coincidence-Geragos was right to bring it up. If I were him, I would have done more to establish that it was rare-or on the flip side from prosecution that it wasn't that rare, but hey, I am not an attorney, so, what do I know.

[TopGunner]

Originally Posted by deputydi

Cadi's response to this post was perfect, but I'd like to add something. If Laci was wearing a jacket (her own or Scott's) this would PROVE each and every one of the eyewitnesses was mistaken. NOT ONE described her wearing a jacket. If she wasn't wearing a jacket, it defies common sense. No one (pregnant or not) is going to take the dog for a walk to the park wearing just a white blouse and black pants in 40 degree weather. We all know these weren't the clothes she was found in 4 months later. So, to me, that means we either must believe the kidnappers took her home to change or Scott was mistaken about the clothes she was wearing that morning. If he wasn't sure what she was wearing, why didn't he simply say "I can't remember" instead of giving the detailed information that was on the poster? If he was too distraught that night to think straight, why didn't he change the description the next day -- the next week -- anytime?

I could go on and on but I'm at work. I ask you, given the choices, which make the most sense? Which are the most believable? Which are the REASONABLE conclusions?

Hi DD at work, I am home today - and it's the perfect BEACH day! Yeah, I'm rubbing it in.......but soon I'll be back to work 24/7 and it'll be your turn, LOL.

Excellent questions here. IMO there was no sense asking ISP anything. Everytime he opened his mouth he lied. He lied when he didn't have to. He lied about lying...I think to continue asking him specific questions was simply muddying the water (no pun). He'd just add another false spin to check out and eliminate. Based on what Laci was found in, all the questions were answered. She never went for a walk. She never even changed out of the cloths she wore on the 23rd. No need to ask about a jacket........

[deputydi]

Originally Posted by onthefence

<SNIP>Based on what i have read here, so far it is a pretty big coincidence-Geragos was right to bring it up. If I were him, I would have done more to establish that it was rare-or on the flip side from prosecution that it wasn't that rare, but hey, I am not an attorney, so, what do I know.

I'd have to dig deep into my memory bank to recall all the details surrounding the watch. IIRC (and I may not), the description of the pawned watch did not match Laci's watch. MG brought it up by waving a receipt around in the air hoping at least one juror would believe it was Laci's watch that was pawned. You can call it a coincidence if you like, but don't expect me to believe it proves anything. It was just ONE -- how many coincidences surrounded Scott's defense? ONE I can accept, but there is a limit before you start sounding gullible.