Scott Petterson Murder Case [Archive] - Private Investigator Forums

Mr Jose Bonavich Jr

12-04-2003, 07:41 PM

Jeleana,

Though to the rational mind divorce would be the only option rather than murder or divorce, you find that a number of spouses will kill their wife/husband rather than divorce them. It could be for the insurance money/property or it could be because they have the mentality "if I can't have you, no one can", or for any reason at all...sometimes there is no explination.

As for Scott, California is a community property state and with a pregnant wife he would be looking at some serious monthly pymts in addition to losing 1/2 of their combined property if not more. That may have been enough of an incentive.

Tina M Phillips

01-02-2004, 01:49 AM

Originally posted by Joanne Rubasky
Hello to all IPIU members,
I would like to know your opion on the Scott Patterson case.
I feel that he guilt of killing his wife and his unborn son. What man would leave his wife on christmas eve to go fishing. First of all christmas is a time to spend with family and love ones, friends.
Now word has it that Ms. Fry is expending a baby? :confused:
Have a great week.

Joanne,

I have to say that I agree. I was just thinking of that point about him leaving on Christmas Eve. He's very much guilty and I am so tired of his smug expressions in court. He seems to be trying very hard not to laugh. SICK!!!

If he's going to be father of Ms. Fry's baby?...I hate to see what will happen next.

Gina Delgado -

01-06-2004, 10:46 AM

This guy is guilty alright. Even if they weren't getting along or had grown apart for some reason, you'd think that he would still feel something for the loss of his wife or better yet, his child!!! And we've all seen his lack of empathy in that distgustingly smug expression on his face. I just hope they have enough evidence to convict him. This man is dangerous!!

Ardis DelaRiva

01-14-2004, 06:47 AM

There's no way he isn't guilty. All the evidence points at him beside he has shown no emotion at times when he should show the most. I also believe that it isn't going to matter where they have the trial there just won't be very many people who vote not guilty.

Deborah Siehl

01-14-2004, 07:41 AM

I feel he is guilty also. Why would he dye his hair a different color and plan a trip to Mexico? (I think that was the location) His wife was still missing, who in their right mind would think of going on a trip at a time like that.

Cherie L. Bruni

01-14-2004, 02:32 PM

Hey Joanne!
I agree! I feel he is guilty also. Seems to be the consensus. Anyone out there with a different opinion? If so, why?

Cherie

Claire J. Davenport--

01-21-2004, 02:08 PM

I also agree that I can't piece together much of a motive for killing Laci Peterson and her unborn son aside from the "if I can't have you no one will" mode on the part of Scott Peterson.

Motive is also the same obstacle I get stuck on when trying to understand the muder of... ugh.. I can't remember.. Barbara Walters interviewed him in jail? Help me out here people? He also killed his wife? Copping an attitude?... Salt and pepper hair turning white?... what was his name again?.. what was his motive?

For some reason (maybe because I'm a woman) I can understand why a woman would cut off her husband's penis, and I can "understand" why a woman would run over her husband three times, but I have more difficulty understanding certain cases of murder on the husbands part (i.e. the two I mentioned above). Than again, these are all media-based cases, so who knows what the facts really are.

John W Tuthill -

01-25-2004, 07:37 PM

He just looks guilty in everything he did or does.

Joanne Rubasky

02-05-2004, 02:01 PM

Breaking from CNN on the Scott Peterson Case.

Defenes Witness Dies!!!!!!:rolleyes:

Lori Carr

02-07-2004, 07:50 AM

guilty vote here

Barbara Compton

02-07-2004, 09:54 AM

If I remeber correctly didn't he tell Ms Fry that he was a widower? It could be greed as well.Did she have an insurance policy?What about people who make donations to help the search? There is another money motive as well. I'm wondering how many people believe that he is innocent, and are helping him with financial support for his lawyers.

Other motive:
If he did file for divorce he knows that he would have to give her money. Child support ect. Then his reputation would be ruiened (not that it isn't now). I think the problem is he didn't expect her family to be so protective. As for affairs, if someone isn't happy in the marriage, don't bring another into it! Just makes matters worst, ex: cutting it off , running them over.

Just my oppion
Barbara Compton

Bonnie Pettegrew

02-07-2004, 11:05 AM

My personal opinion is that he's guilty for all the reasons stated so far. As for a motive - living in California, there are some tough laws regarding divorce and children. Hence the reason why we have so many ex-husbands and fathers who are trying to refuse child support and alimony by leaving the state or hiding.

Anyway, the pieces don't fit as to why he would kill Laci and the baby or as some have speculated had someone else do it. I think that his elevator don't quite go all the way to the top...:eek: :confused:

Bobby Williams

02-07-2004, 02:29 PM

He should have divorced her and suffered the consequences., i.e., (Child Support and Alimony).
Sometimes you have to BUY your way out of a situation. But, for PETE sake don’t MURDER your way out. You only end up in lock down. :( What was he thinking about?

If guilty, he needs to do some serious time for this double murder.

G. Jean Davis

02-07-2004, 08:25 PM

I'm trying really hard to stay with the "no opinion" on this case. I try to put myself on the jury and look at the facts. So far, all the prosecution has is circumstantial evidence. I really don't understand the hair in pliars thing. I mean, if those pliars were ever in the house, her hair could have gotten there by any means. They tried linking his boat to the bouey that he "supposedly" tied up to while dumping her body. The paint did not match.

As I said, I'm not saying he is guilty or not, but just looking at the facts. I'm hoping he did not do it. In this day and age it is getting to be almost a daily thing for a husband or wife to kill their entire family. I just don't understand why in the world if someone does not want a child, give them away, leave them at a gas station or store>>> don't kill them. And as far as marriage goes, sign a paper and wait and it is over. Live your life and don't be a skumbucket.

Just my ramblings. Thanks for listening.

John W Tuthill -

02-07-2004, 09:23 PM

Just saw a clip of an interview with scott on americas most wanted,and they had an anaylist view him and said there was no fascial expression changes,and said nothing about missing her ect. and thought he was guilty.
Sure hope you can't get convicted on a facial look.:(

G. Jean Davis

02-07-2004, 09:28 PM

I also hope the judicial system has not fell down that crack.

Guess we will see soon enough just exactly what they have. I watch Court TV all the time and get all the scoop.

As I said, I truly hope he did not do it cause it is too sad to think about if he did.

Ken Proffitt

02-08-2004, 08:10 AM

I still have to see everything before saying he is guilty, there are plenty of cases of where the husband was accused of killing the wife, but later on, sometimes years later was found not guilty. Cold case files has had alot of these style of cases. So till then I am open.

Michael Harris

02-08-2004, 04:39 PM

To All:

I read a brief report on the movie with Dean Cain starring as Scott Peterson.

Dean Cain turned down the role until his father taked to him. Dean's father asked two questions: Is Scott Peterson a complex character?
Are you an actor?
This got to Dean and he accepted the role. However, Dean said that he did not like being in Scott's skin.

Ken Proffitt

02-08-2004, 09:45 PM

That was interesting, i hear they were making a movie about that case, but didn't hear of any details. Thanks

Michael Harris

02-09-2004, 06:16 AM

Originally posted by Ken Proffitt
I still have to see everything before saying he is guilty, ...
Ken,

That is what we would all like to do - see the evidence that the police have accumulated, not just what the media thinks they know.

The media has already convicted him. He can never get a fair trial.

Ken Proffitt

02-09-2004, 06:32 AM

Originally posted by Michael Harris

Ken,

That is what we would all like to do - see the evidence that the police have accumulated, not just what the media thinks they know.

The media has already convicted him. He can never get a fair trial.

The media is good at doing that alot in the last several years, such a shame everyday people fall for it. But there have been times they were right, still don't give them the right to be judge and jury. Just my 2 cents. :)

Michael Harris

02-09-2004, 07:10 AM

Ken,

At least the media is not the executioner too! :(

Frederick Budde

02-09-2004, 08:01 AM

I agree with Michael. My opinion is that he's guilty, but I've sat on too many court proceedings to form a judgement without hearing all the evidence.

Fred Budde

Michael Harris

02-09-2004, 12:12 PM

Fred,

It is a good thing that most real court proceedings are not as flambouyant as those in Law and Order. Most of what we see on TV is theatrics, not a judicial proceeding.

However, the highly publicized trials will always end up with actors instead of lawyers. :(

G. Jean Davis

02-09-2004, 02:00 PM

Originally posted by Michael Harris
Fred,

It is a good thing that most real court proceedings are not as flambouyant as those in Law and Order. Most of what we see on TV is theatrics, not a judicial proceeding.

However, the highly publicized trials will always end up with actors instead of lawyers. :(

If the real world was as portrayed on the tv shows and in movies, this world would be a totally chaotic mess. They show officers shooting in a street full of people and cars flying all over the place in metropolitan areas and such. I know if the real world was shown it would be too boring for most. But what does this show our youth???? Criminals are flambouyant and you can shoot a gun just anywhere you want???

Back to the court proceedings. Yes, most of the time there is much ado over nothing. That is why I like Court TV. That is real life and no actors involved.

Thanks for your opinions. Greatly appreciated as usual.

:) http://www.blind-justice.nl/gfx/bj.gif

Joanne Rubasky

02-09-2004, 02:34 PM

Hi Everyone, I'm kind of getting sick of hearing about the Scott Peterson case and Michael Jackson case as well. Both of these guys are guilty of their crimes. Let's all take a look at the postive things in life.:) Have a great week.

Michael Harris

02-09-2004, 02:45 PM

Joanne,

We are positive. We are positive that both are guilty.

I know what you mean, but you are in the Scott Peterson Case thread - we cannot talk about anything else in here. :o

Carl V Kowaleski

02-09-2004, 03:58 PM

Sure the guy looks guilty as .... but sometimes I wonder if all this media coverage of trials evokes a type of immaturity or naivete involved with the American public's craving entertainment. I've heard in the English court systems any pretrial publicity leaked to the media and the defendant is found not guilty.<center>http://www.aclu.org/images/template/lefthome.jpg</center>

G. Jean Davis

02-09-2004, 04:22 PM

Michael Harris

02-09-2004, 04:36 PM

Jean,

How right you are!!

They have a movie under production and the trial has not yet started.

Will the verdit from the movie be admissable in the real trial? :eek: :rolleyes: :o

G. Jean Davis

02-09-2004, 05:15 PM

And if they have a verdict in the movie, the jurors will see the movie unless they sequester them.

I never could figure out how they even make movies like this cause what do they use for the ending??? Do they just make them look guilty or do they make up a plot that proves them that way.

It would be nice as I said, if they at least wait until the person is found guilty or innocent before they make a movie about it. :confused:

Tiffany H. Causey

02-09-2004, 08:52 PM

I was also suprised to see that there was already a movie about the Scott Peterson case. It will be interesting to see how it effects the trial. From the evidence I have seen, he looks guilty.
But how can anyone get a fair trial with all the detailed media coverage? I believe most people have already convicted him.

G. Jean Davis

02-09-2004, 09:24 PM

Yes, most people have convicted him no doubt. He may very well be guilty, but a lot of that presumption comes from the media. Look at the rags like Enquirer and such. Do they ever have headlines saying good things>> I think not. In the media, you are presumed guilty until proven innocent.

As I said, I like to keep an open mind on these matters and check out the evidence given during the trial and then make a judgement.

John W Tuthill -

02-10-2004, 02:13 AM

Who is promoting this movie?
Who's going to make money from this movie?
Where did they get their information to make the movie?
Fiction or Non fiction?????

G. Jean Davis

02-10-2004, 03:12 AM

Originally posted by John w Tuthill
Who is promoting this movie?
Who's going to make money from this movie?
Where did they get their information to make the movie?
Fiction or Non fiction?????

Hi John
I have no idea who is promoting this movie other than the tv affiliates. I would think it would be fiction due to the fact they have to be getting their information from the tabloids as there is a gag order on the entire group affiliated with it. I'm sure only the movie maker would be making money on it unless they paid undisclosed sources for any tidbit they can get. It has to be someones hypothasis on media coverage. Same thing they did with the OJ case and that was a terrible movie.

G. Jean Davis

02-10-2004, 03:50 AM

''The fringe elements ... have turned this into a circus,'' he said, adding that two new billboards near freeway entrances close to the courthouse display a photograph of Peterson with the question, ''Man or Monster?''

''The new venue actually appears to be more hostile than Modesto,'' Geragos wrote, citing details about a radio station-sponsored ''billboard-on-a-truck'' that solicited votes on Peterson's guilt or innocence last week. Delucchi subsequently ordered the truck to stay away from the courthouse.

Guilty until proven innocent ! That is "if" he is innocent.

George P. Eells

02-10-2004, 05:29 AM

I do think that he is guilty. The media as usual does exactly what it needs to do for ratings. I do not even think they care if he did it.

Michael Harris

02-10-2004, 07:01 AM

John/Jean,

Since the only thing that we appear to know about the movie is the involvement of Dean Cain, the answers to your questions could be found in an internet search on Dean Cain.

Michael Harris

02-10-2004, 07:11 AM

To All:

I found this site in 15 seconds.

http://www.cainconnection.com/filmography.htm

The movie's working title is The Perfect Husband.

George P. Eells

02-10-2004, 10:29 AM

Michael,

Thanks for the link.:D

Michael Harris

02-10-2004, 12:46 PM

George,

Alwasys a please to help. :D

Ken Proffitt

02-10-2004, 03:10 PM

Originally posted by Michael Harris
To All:

I found this site in 15 seconds.

http://www.cainconnection.com/filmography.htm

The movie's working title is The Perfect Husband.

Thanks, will have to check it out :)

Michael Harris

02-10-2004, 03:18 PM

Ken,

It is nice to know that some answers are easy - finding a website. Some answers are not easy -is he guilty?

Michael Harris

02-10-2004, 03:20 PM

John Tuthill,

Thanks.

I was not interested enough to ask the questions that you did. I am not overly interested in the answers, but I was gratified to know that the website on the movie existed.

Sometimes we do not follow through on issues and need someone else to ask the probing questins.

Again, Thanks.

Dragos Sfinteanu

02-10-2004, 11:41 PM

We could talk about Geragos, who is trying hard to defend both guys. :rolleyes:

Ronald Charen

02-11-2004, 04:31 AM

I must say everything is leading up to him doing it, but i cant truly say he did it with out me personally working on this case.

Latasha Stouff

02-11-2004, 01:10 PM

I can't belive anyone would do such a thing. I think he is gulity and he should definetly sit in jail for a long time for that. He needs to be remined everday what he did and pay all the consequences.

Ronald Charen

02-11-2004, 01:29 PM

Hi Latasha
I think they should put her and the babies picture in his jail cell wall with a baby crying every hour for the rest of his life. What do you think.

Ronald Charen

02-11-2004, 01:32 PM

Originally posted by Ronald Charen
Hi Latasha
I think they should put her and the babies picture in his jail cell wall with a baby crying every hour for the rest of his life. What do you think.

John W Tuthill -

02-14-2004, 08:31 PM

Did anyone watch the TV movie: I think it made him look very guilty I really don't think it helped him at all. I think it was made up of media stories and tv stories.

G. Jean Davis

02-14-2004, 08:38 PM

Originally posted by John w Tuthill
Did anyone watch the TV movie: I think it made him look very guilty I really don't think it helped him at all. I think it was made up of media stories and tv stories.

No, I did not watch it. I would rather watch the ongoing court proceedings but they won't allow cameras.

I wouldn't think it would have helped him. I wonder how many of the future jurors saw it and what impact it will have on them.

Michael Harris

02-14-2004, 08:43 PM

Originally posted by Ronald Charen
...I think they should put her and the babies picture in his jail cell wall with a baby crying every hour for the rest of his life. ...
Ronald,

You are so mean. I love it. This is what real 'justice' is all about.

Dragos Sfinteanu

02-14-2004, 10:47 PM

Michael,

Making a movie about Petterson case before the trial is not only not-ethical (I am talking all 5-figure rule) but it could create a dangerous precedent: influencing a segment (smaller or larger) of population, and obstructing the justice. In this respect they moved the trial from Modesto.

This precedent (to the best of my knowledge) creates the possibility for a lawyer to fund (indirectly, more likely) a pre-trial movie favoring his/her client. I think this would be a judiciary/legal issue.

Deborah Siehl

02-14-2004, 11:57 PM

I was able to watch some of the movie. Scott didn't seem to act as we (the public) think he should have acted. He didn't show any emotion one way or the other. I did notice that they did a "goof" In the movie, while Lacy is still in the missing phase, her close friend mentions that they took a girl into the house to see if she could find the clothes that Lacy was wearing the morning she disappeared. The close freind (actress) stated that they didn't find the clothes in the house , they were still on Lacy in the bay.

The cops may have suspected the bay, but I don't know if they would have mentioned it.

Also the fact that Lacy's head was not with her body, what could that mean? Did the sharks get her or was she put in the bay with no head.

If the person who killed her cut her head off, could they be hoping to hide the identity of the body, or was the person so angry they went on a rage? Or could it be both?

Everybody seems to be overlooking the girlfriend, Amber in this. Sure, Scott lied to her about his marital status, but how bad did she want him? Would she have killed Lacy to get what she wanted?

Could they have committed the crime together? Amber did the deed, and Scott helped her get rid of the body, that is why the blood and hair was found in his truck.

I would say that Scott had some part in it, to disguise himself and try to get out of the country.

Just my views, guys and girls.

Any feed back is welcome.

Michael Harris

02-15-2004, 08:14 AM

Dragos,

You have expressed the thoughts I was having.

I agree with you and feel that justice has been or will be subverted by the movie.

Michael Harris

02-15-2004, 08:18 AM

Originally posted by Deborah Siehl
...Scott didn't seem to act as we (the public) think he should have acted. ...
Deborah,

This is part of the problem, we (the public) wanted him to grieve and he did not.

This brings us to a serious problem with police work - if a witness or suspect does not react the way the polilce believe that he/she should, suspicion mounts.

Each of us grieves in our own way. When communities were smaller and extended families were much larger, people were conditioned to act and react in much the same way. If a family member died, you cried. Now, people have no idea how to react to the death of a loved one.

Of course, none of this excuses Scott.

John W Tuthill -

02-25-2004, 02:39 PM

Has anyone heard what's going on in the peterson case.I guess his 15min of fame is over,not much in the news anymore.Haven't heard anything on court tv either.

G. Jean Davis

02-25-2004, 02:48 PM

Originally posted by John W Tuthill
Has anyone heard what's going on in the peterson case.I guess his 15min of fame is over,not much in the news anymore.Haven't heard anything on court tv either.

There is a closed door hearing coming up on Monday as to what and if certain evidence will be allowed. They are keeping pretty much closed mouth as per the gag order.

John W Tuthill -

02-25-2004, 03:29 PM

You mean a gag order is really working.

G. Jean Davis

02-25-2004, 03:38 PM

Originally posted by John W Tuthill
You mean a gag order is really working.

I think it is other than rumors and speculation by the media. The judge gave all of them a very harsh warning.

Victoria D'Cotledge

02-26-2004, 01:53 AM

Originally posted by Ardis DelaRiva
There's no way he isn't guilty. All the evidence points at him beside he has shown no emotion at times when he should show the most. I also believe that it isn't going to matter where they have the trial there just won't be very many people who vote not guilty.

My thoughts exactly. You know the old saying, "the guilty run when they're not being chased." Why the hair color change? Why the sudden need to travel? Did he not care at all about his missing wife and son, if he wasn't the one who murdered them and knew all along of their whereabouts?

Not only does he have no scrupples, he is an idiot and as obvious as the cat who ate the canary!

Victoria D'Cotledge

02-26-2004, 02:06 AM

Originally posted by Carl V Kowaleski
Sure the guy looks guilty as .... but sometimes I wonder if all this media coverage of trials evokes a type of immaturity or naivete involved with the American public's craving entertainment. I've heard in the English court systems any pretrial publicity leaked to the media and the defendant is found not guilty.<center>http://www.aclu.org/images/template/lefthome.jpg</center>

I think it's a shame the media can control the minds of the viewers with this type of hype and sometimes smut, in order to boost their ratings. The TV movie should be sued and the court should issue a gag order!

While I'm of the opinion Peterson is a creep and guilty as sin, I still think he should be entitled to a media-free trial being judged by a jury of his peers.

The way the media and production companies are moving on his story, the whole world is now apart of his peer pool and only one opinion is being formed - with or without damning evidence - GUILTY!

Victoria

John W Tuthill -

02-26-2004, 03:57 AM

Do you think he might walk because he can't get an unbious group of people. The world knows what his actions have been,and from all the comments on this fourm which is a good sample of the USA,he hasen't got a chance in _ _ _ _!.His lawler is going to have to have something pretty good to pull him out of this mess.

G. Jean Davis

02-26-2004, 03:59 AM

Originally posted by Victoria D'Cotledge
I think it's a shame the media can control the minds of the viewers with this type of hype and sometimes smut, in order to boost their ratings. The TV movie should be sued and the court should issue a gag order!

While I'm of the opinion Peterson is a creep and guilty as sin, I still think he should be entitled to a media-free trial being judged by a jury of his peers.

The way the media and production companies are moving on his story, the whole world is now apart of his peer pool and only one opinion is being formed - with or without damning evidence - GUILTY!

Victoria

There has been a gag order for sometime now but that does not pertain to the media. Nothing could stop them anyway. I agree with you on the part that he should not be proclaimed guilty by anyone until all the evidence has been seen and or heard.

John W Tuthill -

02-26-2004, 05:28 AM

Thursday,Feb.26,2004

Scott Peterson's double-mueder trile will last 5 months,a judge said Wednesday,with 200 potential jurors due in court next Thursday for what promises to be a long selection process.

Judge Alfred A. Delucchi announced those details before lawyers resumed arguing over the admissibility of evidence from cadaver-sniffing dogs.Prosecutors maintain the dogs provided important clues to how Peterson allegedly disposed of his wife's body,while the defense argues the canines are unreliable.

On Wednesday,testimony continued from Elose Anderson,who trained a labrador retriever that sniffed Peterson's boat and warehouse for signs that his pregnant wife had been there.Court documents said the dog,Twist,showed only"mild interest"in Peterson's boat, where prosecutors allege he carried his wife's body before dumping her in SanFrancisco Bay.

Defence lawyer mark Geragos wants the judg to toss out all evidence gathered by tracking dogs.

I already know the judge isn't going to toss out this evidence

John W Tuthill -

02-26-2004, 06:57 AM

EVIDENCE
GPS data Ten days after Laci Peterson vanished,investigators began keeping tabs on her husband's movements with Global Positioning System tracking devices attached to his vehicles he owned,rented and borrowed.

THE DENESE SAYS
GPS technology "has not been generally accepted by the scientific community"and poor antenna placement by Modesto police"led to hours-long gaps in mapping that makes the resuslts meaningless.

THE PROSECUTION SAYS
Courts have addmitted GPS technology before and routinely use it to monitor parolees and sex offenders,.The defense cross-examine police about the gaps,but the evidence should come in.Prosecutors said they won't persent the evidence until trial The judge will rule then.

THE JUDGE RULING
ALLOWED

William Kist

02-26-2004, 09:01 AM

EVERYONE KNOWS HE DID IT I'M GETTING TIRIED OF HEARING ABOUT IT THEY JUST NEED TO TREAT HIM LIKE HE TREATED HIS WIFE AND UNBORN CHILD.
IN THIS WORLD THERE'S MEN OUT THERE THAT PRAY EVERYDAY TO HAVE A LIFE LIKE HE HAD A VERY PRETTY WIFE BARING CHILD AND HE THROWS IT AWAY HE NEEDS TO GET JUST WHATS COMING TO HIM BUT WE DO NOT NEED TO DRAG IT ON JUST GET IT OVER WITH AND GET IT OFF THE NEWS.
I'M SORRY IF THIS LETTER IS A LITTLE STRONG WITH ALL THE CAPITAL LETTERS BUT IN MY MIND AND HEART WHEN IT COMES TO YOUR WIFE AND FAMILY THESE KIND OF STORYS REALLY GET UNDER MY SKIN AND I KNOW THE LORD SAYS YOU SHOULD NOT HATE BUT MAN I HAVE NO FURGIVENESS FOR PEOPLE LIKE THIS I HAVE ALL KINDS OF FEELING FOR HIS WIFE AND CHILD.MY GOD HOW COULD SOME DO SOMETHING LIKE THIS AND BREATH EVERYDAY. I HURT INSIDE JUST THINKING ABOUT!
A MANS WIFE AND FAMILY IS EVERYTHING.
THANKS FOR READING MY IDEAS ON THIS STORY,SORRY IT TOOK SO LONG TO EXPLAIN GOD BLESS AND BE SAFE IN WHAT EVER YOU DO.:confused: :confused: :confused: :confused:

G. Jean Davis

02-26-2004, 10:40 AM

Great reporting on this case. I'm sure everyone likes your updates.

Thanks. :)

Michael Harris

02-26-2004, 11:33 AM

William,

In the forums, all caps is considered 'shouting'. More importantly, it is very hard to read. Use bold or a combination of bold and italics instead of the CAPs.

Also, you might consider an extra space between paragraphs - that makes it easier to read.

I understand your concern. The man is evil and GOD will get him if the courts do not.

Timothy Greenlee

02-26-2004, 08:03 PM

Well I watched the movie and in the end I still felt like he was guilty but there was a doubt in my mind also. There is no motive to the killing and theyfound hair on the boat. That hair could have been on the boat from her being there prior to this fishing trip he took. I think the jury will find him guilty. I still have doubts:confused:

Carolyn Peddicord

02-26-2004, 08:36 PM

I haven't really done any research lately so I don't know the status of this case. I followed it very closely for the first couple of months because I have great faith in forensics and thought there would be a conviction forthcoming. Does anyone really know what the police do have? I can only assume that there still isn't enough evidence??:confused:

As far as motive, I've seen enough to know that most times it doesn't make any sense at all.

G. Jean Davis

02-26-2004, 09:53 PM

So far all they have is circumstantial. The two hairs in the pliars, (in my opinion) could have gotten there if they had been kept in the house prior to being put in the boat. Therefore I don't see how they can justify themselves in saying that proves she was in the boat, dead or alive.

However, they are still looking in the ocean for the surmised cement blocks "they say" were used to weight her down.

I watch whatever they may have on Court TV daily but have not seen anything new lately. Guess we will have to wait until the trial starts to see exactly what evidence they do have.

Regardless of who did this terrible thing, it is just too sad for Lacey and Connor and their families. I really feel for them. :(

G. Jean Davis

02-27-2004, 05:47 AM

MODESTO, California = Scott Peterson is free to sell his story to the movies or make book deals, a judge ruled over the objections of Peterson's slain wife's mother.

Separately, another judge ruled Thursday that the jury at Peterson's murder trial will not be sequestered, despite warnings from the defense about the public's fascination with the case.

Robert G Paluch

02-28-2004, 09:19 AM

Scott Peter
Motive: Amber Frey and any other female he would be free to play with if his wife was out of the picture.
Why murder instead of divorce? You need the money to play.
Problem? All evidence is circumstantial. The Prosecution is really reaching to place him closer to Lacey. The Prosecution really needs the the media to sway the jury. Look how many of us believe he is guilty.
Myself included. This doen't make the prosecutions approach right it may be correct for their purposes.
Thank you for permitting me to voice my opinion.
I love this place.:)

John W Tuthill -

02-28-2004, 12:13 PM

TRACKING DOGS

THE ISSUE

Peterson said his wife planned to take a walk the morning she went missing,but police scent-sniffing dogs indicated she left her home Christmas Eve morning not by foot,but by car.

DEFENSE SAYS

The dog evidence is less reliable than in other cases because the trail was not fresh and the animals never actually found the person tracked-Laci Peterson.

tHE PROSECUTION SAYS

The bloodhound and retriever used had previously found trails that were much older than Laci Peterson's,and they tracked her to "the body of water where the victims' bodies were recovered."

THE JUDGE RULING

Allowed!:)

Michael Harris

02-28-2004, 12:44 PM

Jean,

Sequestering the jury is closing the barn door after the horses have already run away.

The jury cannot be influenced any more than they are (by the media).

Michael Harris

02-28-2004, 12:46 PM

Robert,

I agree with most of your points. However, I do not think the prosecution is smart or capable enough to have the media influence the jurors.

Michael Harris

02-28-2004, 12:48 PM

John,

Two things:[list=1] The judge was right.
You presentation of the information was very easy to read and to follow. Multiple brownie points.
[/list=1]

G. Jean Davis

02-28-2004, 12:51 PM

Originally posted by Michael Harris
Jean,

Sequestering the jury is closing the barn door after the horses have already run away.

The jury cannot be influenced any more than they are (by the media).

The barn door has been wide open way too long now for sequestering to do any good at all. That would have to of been done a long time ago and that is not possible.

They haven't even been chosen yet and I'm sure most of the populas has already made up their minds.

Michael Harris

02-28-2004, 12:54 PM

Jean,

When you let the media run away with a story, the facts become distorted and the case is tried in the media, not the courtroom.

How is he paying for all the legal support? By selling his side of the story before trial.

G. Jean Davis

02-28-2004, 01:02 PM

Originally posted by Michael Harris
Jean,

When you let the media run away with a story, the facts become distorted and the case is tried in the media, not the courtroom.

How is he paying for all the legal support? By selling his side of the story before trial.

Sharon Rocha, Laci Peterson's mother, asked the court to keep any payments from commercial use of Peterson's story in a trust account until a verdict is reached.

Superior Court Judge Roger Beauchesne said Wednesday's ruling was tentative and could be changed. He gave Rocha's attorney 20 days to return to court with new arguments.

"It's a minor setback to victims' rights, but it's certainly not the final word on the issue." said Adam Stewart, Rocha's lawyer

I'm sure if and or when he does sell anything pertaining to this, he will not receive a dime of the proceeds. At least we could hope so.

John W Tuthill -

02-28-2004, 01:29 PM

EVIDENCE

HYPNOTIZED WITNESS

Police used hypnosis to probe the memory of a pregnant neighbor of the Petersons named Kristen Dempewolf.Prosecutors reportedly believe citizens who said they saw the missing woman the estimated time of death actually saw Dempewolf.

DEFENSE SAYS

By hiring"an unqualified hypnotist directly involed in...law enforcement" and improperly perserving Dempewolf's"prehypnotic memory,"prosecutors failed to follow the strict law for hypnotizing witnesses.

THE PROSECUTION SAYS

Never mind.After the defense objection,prosectors said they would not call Dempewolf at the prelim,but would call her for the trial.They also warned that defense arguments against Dempewolf are just as valid against another hypnotized witness who 's account of a suspious man may help peterson's case.

JUDGE RULING

Excluded:mad:

Michael Harris

03-01-2004, 06:27 PM

John,

The use of hypnosis is iffy at best. The judge is right on this one.

Joyce C Dixon

03-02-2004, 07:59 AM

hello: Jail he goes and Jail he stays he is a very sick man.

G. Jean Davis

03-10-2004, 02:46 AM

REDWOOD CITY, California (CNN) -- The judge in Scott Peterson's murder trial will delay jury selection to consider a new motion for a change of venue from Peterson's attorney.

Attorney Mark Geragos asked for the high-profile trial to be moved again because jury questionnaires show a large percentage of potential jurors have "prejudged" the guilt of his client.

John W Tuthill -

03-10-2004, 04:30 AM

"He can run but he can't hide" They can move the trial to NY and they will still get the same reaction.I don't think they can hold a jury trial any where in this country! Unless they can find some backwater town that don't have regular news.:eek:

Bonnie Pettegrew

03-10-2004, 10:56 AM

I saw on Fox News this morning that they want to move the trial again! This case is getting ridiculous. They need to just get a jury and start the trial. Personally I feel he's guilty - but I'm not on the jury.....

Michael Harris

03-10-2004, 12:00 PM

Bonnie,

It is a shame that the defense lawyers have been hyping his innocence and the faulty evidence in the press. Now they think he has had too much press.

Just fry his b*** and move on.

Bonnie Pettegrew

03-10-2004, 12:42 PM

Originally posted by Michael Harris
Bonnie,

It is a shame that the defense lawyers have been hyping his innocence and the faulty evidence in the press. Now they think he has had too much press.

Just fry his b*** and move on.

I think he's had too much press because they've drug this whole thing out personally. However, we'll see what happens.

John W Tuthill -

03-10-2004, 01:00 PM

Bonnie
Thats why they want to move the trial,again because the forms they had prospetive jury members fill out indicated they want to Hang um!!!:eek:

Michael Harris

03-10-2004, 01:22 PM

John,

Blame Scott and his lawyers.

John W Tuthill -

03-10-2004, 02:28 PM

So what happens if you can't find a jury? Hold a trial by Judge.

Michael Harris

03-10-2004, 09:15 PM

John,

That is interesting. The accused is guaranteed a trial by jury, but can always ask for a trial by judge.

Maybe the tactic is to exclude every potential juror and claim that his Constitutional rights have been violated and must be set free.

A trail by judge would be offered. If he refuses, fry his b*** anyway. He is costing us all too much money. How is he paying for this?

G. Jean Davis

03-10-2004, 09:19 PM

Originally posted by Michael Harris
John,

That is interesting. The accused is guaranteed a trial by jury, but can always ask for a trial by judge.

Maybe the tactic is to exclude every potential juror and claim that his Constitutional rights have been violated and must be set free.

A trail by judge would be offered. If he refuses, fry his b*** anyway. He is costing us all too much money. How is he paying for this?

His parents have mortgaged their property to the hilt to pay his legal fees. Wonder how long that will last.

Poor parents on both sides of this one. :(

Michael Harris

03-10-2004, 09:28 PM

Jean,

If I did something wrong, I would have to have a public defender!?!?!?!
:(

G. Jean Davis

03-10-2004, 09:30 PM

Originally posted by Michael Harris
Jean,

If I did something wrong, I would have to have a public defender!?!?!?!
:(

My dogs house wouldn't be worth too much but I'm sure he would mortgage it to save me............ ha ha

Michael Harris

03-10-2004, 09:33 PM

Jean,

There is something so wrong with a system that forces accused people to give up their lives and their families' lives to get justice.

Is a trial attorney really worth $500 an hour?

G. Jean Davis

03-10-2004, 09:39 PM

But think about it>>>>>>

Are the basketball players or football players worth millions a year??????????

Everything in this world is way overinflated.

And to what you said, no, the attornies are not worth that. They are way overpaid as most of the upper society is. :rolleyes:

John W Tuthill -

03-11-2004, 01:17 PM

Michael
From what i've seen of public defenders you might be better off defending your self.Don't mean to cut them down because their might be some good ones out there some where.I have yet to meet one that really cares.:rolleyes:

Frederick Budde

03-11-2004, 01:32 PM

John;
Speaking from the NY perspective, you're 100% correct. They are overworked, underpaid, and lose interest quite quickly! Then there's the types they are called upon to defend.

Fred
:rolleyes:

Michael Harris

03-11-2004, 01:51 PM

John & Fred,

Remind me to stay honest.

Frederick Budde

03-11-2004, 02:04 PM

Actually Michael, things aren't really that bad, we just want to keep the New Jersey drivers on their side of the bridge :)

Fred

Kurk Petterson

03-15-2004, 11:46 AM

Guilty.

Michael Harris

03-15-2004, 07:43 PM

Fred,

From my perspective, the other side of the bridge is Philadelphia.

Mary Cervantes

03-17-2004, 01:16 PM

I think Peterson is guilty. They need to get on with the trial and stop having us listen to all the trash.
If they stayed out of the Press in the first place they wouldn't have this problem... Sorry about their luck.

Robert G Paluch

03-17-2004, 05:11 PM

Mary,
You being from California, Do you think Scott Peterson will have a fair trial? Who should have stayed out of the press; Defense or Prosecution? Should the pressed have been gag ordered? If so then how could you have arrived at your guilty verdict? HMMMMMMMMMM.:)

Mary Cervantes

03-17-2004, 09:20 PM

I Still believe he will get a fair trial. I think both defense and prosecution should of spent less time in the press. Maybe not a gag order but they( both sides) could of been more selective of what went out to the press.

As for why I think he is guilty.... why would a loving husband leave his very pregnant wife a lone on Christmas Eve.

Mary

Robert G Paluch

03-18-2004, 06:06 AM

Mary,
It's my understanding that the Peterson's Christmas tradition is to eat fish.

John W Tuthill -

03-18-2004, 06:37 AM

(HOLY MACKEREL) for Christmas dinner. If fish is a tradition in the faimily why not go the day before,so you can spend time together Christmas.

Oh if he wants mackerele he'd have to go to the Alantic.Maybe he wouldn't be in this problem if he had gone.:eek:

Frederick Budde

03-18-2004, 01:49 PM

Just when I thought we had heard all there is on this case: Get a copy of Law Enforcement Technology (March 2004) and read the comments by Dawn Perlmutter from the Institute for the Research of Organized and Ritual Violence on page 63.

It appears there might be something to his defense claim of a "ritualistic murder". Not that he's off the hook. Usually a family member is involved. Interesting reading.

Fred

Robert G Paluch

03-19-2004, 10:32 AM

John,
They wanted fresh fish :D

Maria Jonas

03-24-2004, 06:17 PM

Have you ever wondered if maybe Scott Peterson is not all there? I mean, I work with special education students, and some of them really don't seem too different from others. Not saying that is an excuse, but sometimes when people have problems, they tend to not have a logical thinking pattern, and do stupid stuff like kill their wife, when all he really had to do was move to a state that maybe was less harsh on the man during divorces. I was watching some news channel, and they said that Laci was dropping hints that something was not right with Scott way before she was found. A lot of things you don't find out about the husband until way up the line. But of course, that might be hearsay, right?

Robert G Paluch

03-24-2004, 08:22 PM

Miss Ria,
If Petersen did do this his planning wasn't exactly illogical. That is to say there isn't something wrong with him for having committed the act. It's my understanding that sociapaths are highly intelligent and vey logical. They just don't feel.
Your thoughts.

Maria Jonas

03-25-2004, 12:17 PM

Originally posted by Robert G. Paluch
Miss Ria,
If Petersen did do this his planning wasn't exactly illogical. That is to say there isn't something wrong with him for having committed the act. It's my understanding that sociapaths are highly intelligent and vey logical. They just don't feel.
Your thoughts.

Oh, no, I never said there was anything wrong with him. I just offered another possibility for discussion. No one will ever know all the facts surrounding the case except for maybe Scott and Laci, but I just like speculating. Sometimes the things we don't think are possible, could very well be the answer. Anyway, who is to say how long he planned it, and did he even think it out all the way? Maybe he was desperate when he found out about the other pregnant girl and didn't want Laci to find out? You never know how he was thinking...

Gunnard Lundberg

04-21-2004, 11:43 PM

This whole story sounds fishy. His lawyers want there cake and eat it too. :eek:

Dabra J Grant -

04-23-2004, 08:58 AM

I am surprised that so many people have decided that Scott Peterson is guilty. Is this simply because of the media circus, and if so perhaps it is time to block out the media, so that one can think for oneself and not be unduly influenced.

I can only surmise that one must proceed to the truth not based on emotions, but on fact, and hard cold evidence. I am sure that the defense team has paid large amounts of money out to all manner of investigators to get any shred of evidence.

The prosecution has also done the same. The balance of evidence will in the end determine whether Peterson is acquitted or sentenced. Meanwhile how easy will it be to find an unbiased jury? Judging by the opinions here, he is in the minds of the majority guilty.

As for me I have no opinion yet as to Scott Peterson’s guilt, as I have not seen the evidence. I feel great sadness that Lacey and her unborn babies' lives were snuffed out, and although all fingers point to Scott Peterson, the evidence must be reviewed. Innocent until proven guilty. I pray that if he is guilty he will be punished, and that justice is served, but that could depend on a thorough investigation, and someday perhaps one of us will provide the missing link to either convict or acquit.

As a prospective Private Investigator (trainee), I would imagine that one would need to be leave emotions and pre-judgments behind in order to access the truth and to effectively gather evidence. Is this correct?

This is not to say that a strong emotional response can not be the fodder to dig deeply to uncover any relevant details, but emotions like wine have a way of impairing judgment.

Joseph Krause

04-23-2004, 05:57 PM

Many of us think he is guilty but I don't think that Ms Fry believes her and her baby could be next.

Susan Yee

04-28-2004, 02:07 PM

I cannot help but agree with Debra when she wrote -- "I am surprised that so many people have decided that Scott Peterson is guilty...." -- or are we all suckered into 'GroupThink'?

What really bothers me are these facts:

Scott Peterson under surveillance was caught with his brother's driver ID, dyed hair, and $10,000 in cash ready to cross the Mexican border. WHY would an innocent man run? And yet to the best of my memory, he has yet to declare his innocence in public.

My perception is that an innocent man would vigilantly fight for the TRUTH and his FREEDOM and his HONOR.

Dabra J Grant -

04-28-2004, 02:32 PM

I cannot help but agree with Debra when she wrote -- "I am surprised that so many people have decided that Scott Peterson is guilty...." -- or are we all suckered into 'GroupThink'?

What really bothers me are these facts:

My perception is that an innocent man would vigilantly fight for the TRUTH and his FREEDOM and his HONOR.

Hi Susan,

Group Think as you put it, is in my opinion, is a practice that anyone who is seriously interested in investigative work cannot afford to participate in very much.

I believe that in order to be an effective investigator, one needs to "think outside the box". But also understanding group think is a necessity as well, in order to discover the various thought patterns of the people you are investigating.

It is difficult to understand or perceive what is in the mind of someone who is capable of murder. I suppose that is why studies in criminology are necessary. Anyway I just thought I'd say hello and I hope to bump into you again at "The IPIU Electronic University".

Dabra J Grant,
P.I. Trainee
Washington State

Susan Yee

04-30-2004, 01:47 PM

Debra,
Hello!
Thanks for your note. It's been awhile since I am reminded to "think outside the box." From my experience, unfortunately, it's a common phrase adopted by Fortune 500 corporations trying to be proactive (on paper anyway) while dictating "conformity" on their employees, e.g. to fly in formation, with no leaders and nobody at its tail-end.

I agree with you that studies in Criminology are necessary, in this profession. It is so true; life is continuous learning -- now I have another field to explore. Hope to communicate with you when I find "The IPIU Electronic University."

Happy Friday!

Dabra J Grant -

04-30-2004, 02:06 PM

Debra,
Hello!

I agree with you that studies in Criminology are necessary, in this profession. It is so true; life is continuous learning -- now I have another field to explore. Hope to communicate with you when I find "The IPIU Electronic University."

Happy Friday!

Hi Susan, It's here. It's you, it's me, it's all of this community. Hey, Thanks for letting me know I didn't miss out on a thing by not having ever gone the Fortune 500 way!

I love your description, it's amazing the humor we can find after experiencing things which at the time we were in them was not a laughing matter.

"See" you around, I've been doing lots of reading, research and writing, here at the "IPIU Electronic Campus" as I'm between jobs.

Eloisa Mooney

04-30-2004, 02:15 PM

Debra,

I love your comments about "Group Think". Very true words.

John W Tuthill -

04-30-2004, 02:21 PM

Are they ever going to trial,or are they still trying to figure out where to have it. :rolleyes:

Susan Yee

04-30-2004, 04:28 PM

John,
Last time I heard they were thinking of moving the trial to the Los Angeles area. Who knows what the motion or motive is? Another smoke-and-mirrors move??

John W Tuthill -

04-30-2004, 06:52 PM

Maybe if they wait long enought it will die down in the media and can get a fair trial (Doubt if anyone will forget). :eek:

Richard Maxwell

05-02-2004, 09:51 PM

Scott Peterson is innocent until proven guilty. The man does appear to be giving many indications that he has something to hide but intil it is presented to a jury, we'll all have to wait and see what a jury of his peers thinks.

I'm just glad I'm not on the defense team. That die job, having his brother's ID and $10k within arms reach of Mexico has to be one of the dumbest moves. Of course, no one ever said you had to be smart to be a "suspected" felon.

John W Tuthill -

07-05-2004, 03:49 PM

Has anyone kept up with the case,the last i heard he may walk. :confused: The good guys are blowing it.

Heather Welborn

07-05-2004, 04:13 PM

It's true he may walk, and that's part of what sometimes sucks with our judicial system. Everything can be pointing to one man and that man can be totally ready to go to the electric chair but god-forbid their was a police officer who touched something at the crime scene, or a detective that said the wrong word in interogation. These are things that can make an obviously guilty murderer go "SCOTT"free.

I'm sure no morally sound person can wrap their heads around what makes a murderer kill. There are too many reasons for why people do what they do. It can be something as obscure as a woman wearing red fingernail polish to someone having the "wrong" last name. Sometimes, we will just never know.

Scott on the other hand has made every single move of a guilty man, whether it's coincidence or not. He looks guilty, acts guilty and even speaks guilty. I hope to god he is brought to justice so we don't have to wait for another Lacy to show up.

Amber B. Moore

07-18-2004, 12:04 AM

It is my opinion that he is guilty. Especially since he was caught with the dye job and the money and gear that would aid him in living the life of a recluse for a while. Even though the evidence is circumstantial there is a LOT of it.... I feel like maybe he did tell laci about the affair and maybe they got into a fight that night and things may have gotten out of hand possibly. But then again he had already purchased the fishing license to go fishing on that day....and he had told Amber that he was widowed gosh if he is innocent he has the worst luck in the world. I really dont feel that Amber had anything at all to do with it. I cant wait until she (AMBER) takes the witness stanD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Victoria S Kinney

07-18-2004, 04:46 AM

There have been alot of good points brought up. I still want to see all the evidence that they have. But the media has him already tried and basically sentenced to. By the time you read this Ms. Frye will already have her baby and find out that it was not Scott Peterson's. I can't believe they made a movie before the trial had really even started. We will just have to wait and see what happens.

Patrice-Maria Love

07-20-2004, 07:24 AM

Scott Petersen's actions like all other criminals, display their guilt.

Michelle L Danahy -

07-20-2004, 07:48 AM

I find him guilty too. My mother on the other hand says that they have not proved beyond a reasonable doubt that he is guilty. Are you kidding me?! He couldnt explain all those inconsistencies even if he wanted to. So they dont have the smoking gun. People have been found guilty on less.

Scott Peterson reeks of guilt!

Frederick Budde

07-21-2004, 10:11 AM

Flora Porter

08-06-2004, 06:46 AM

Fred,

From my perspective, the other side of the bridge is Philadelphia.
Hi Mike,

Or Memorial Bridge. :confused:
If he is guilty lets convict him and stop him from sitting in court with that smug look. Like he just did a 'OJ'
And he :cool: is going to get away with it.

P.I.Trainee
Flora

Michael Harris

08-06-2004, 07:27 AM

Flora,

I live in South Jersey and the closest bridges are the ones to Philadelphia.

Scott Peterson is hoping for a "technicality" to save him. No one who has read about the case believes he is innocent.

John W Tuthill -

08-06-2004, 08:15 AM

There is a problem,last night everyone was talking about having information that may set him free,Something about the baby,didn't chatch it all.

Julie Mercer -

08-06-2004, 08:35 AM

Based on his behavior, I have to say "Guilty all the way" :mad: Just a gut feeling! Last night, on the news, I saw him in court. He has lost a lot of weight. The ex-girlfriend is gearing up to testify. That should be very interesting because the Defense is saying that they want to dredge up some of her past. Her attorney is deeply opposed to that happening. We will see.

Denise Damazio

08-06-2004, 09:45 AM

I will be very disappointed if they don't get this guy.. I truly believe he is guilty!

April R Groff

08-06-2004, 05:53 PM

I have to agree with the majority vote, because I believe that Scott is guilty of a double murder. However, the prosecutors are severly lacking in evidence. I read in some magazine that the way the proceedings were going, Scott was going to get off Scott free just like OJ. They were saying that there was a van driving up and down the street before Laci was murdered, so they are going to try to blame them for the murder. I detest that sneaky smurk on his face, so I can't even watch anymore. April

Richard Maxwell

08-07-2004, 10:10 AM

From the threads here and watching Court TV, Peterson walks unless the prosecutor has a witness that testifies that Peterson admitted to killing his wife and son. At this time its looking like the prosecutors rushed into this without enough evidence to meet the reasonable doubt test. If they lose and he's guilty then he gets away with murder.

Julie Mercer -

08-09-2004, 10:31 AM

I detest that sneaky smurk on his face, so I can't even watch anymore. April
April,
Exactly! He is so smug!
Julie

Veronica Crowder -

08-09-2004, 07:38 PM

Whatever happened to the allegations of another girl in Scott Peterson's life that disappeared while they were in college?? She has never been found either I don't think. Wasn't she his girlfriend at the time of her disappearance? Dosen't it seem odd that there would be not only one death tied to his name but possibly two?

Steve McAtee

08-09-2004, 07:54 PM

I hate to go out on this limb but my gut feeling is: NOT Guilty!

Now does he have vital information about who did? I think so, but like the OJ case - not enough evidence = Walking Papers!

Frederick Budde

08-10-2004, 06:54 AM

I hate to go out on this limb but my gut feeling is: NOT Guilty!

Now does he have vital information about who did? I think so, but like the OJ case - not enough evidence = Walking Papers!
I have to go with Steve on this. He's a dispicable person, but I haven't seen enough evidence to convict (yet).

Julie Mercer -

08-10-2004, 09:13 AM

Michael Harris

08-10-2004, 09:46 AM

Julie/Veronica,

that is a most interesting allegation. If it has merit, the feelings about Scott get even worse.

One of the posts asked why would an innocent man flee; in Scott's case, he just looks SO guilty.

The answer is that there can be public sympathy for the victim and that could scare an innocent man - but Scott is not innocent.

Flora Porter

08-11-2004, 06:30 AM

Brenda Templin

08-11-2004, 06:21 PM

Well, until today I was about 90% for guilty and 10% for innocent.
Now he says his favorite movie is "The Shining", a movie about a man that goes nuts and tries to kill his wife!! Geez.....

What is he up to? If that is, in fact, his favorite movie, why would he tell it????? :eek: I have my ideas, but what do I know? Will wait and see.

I'm getting closer and closer to saying 100% guilty!

Brenda

Steve McAtee

08-11-2004, 07:01 PM

I am still hanging out on this limb! I think he wants everyone to think he is a true NUT. IMHO (In My Honest Opinion) I feel he is not guilty of the crime but is guilty of being a total loser. But then again I am not the one that has to judge him someday. He will get what he deserves.

Flora Porter

08-11-2004, 07:03 PM

Hello Brenda,

I dont know what he could be up to, but he definately enjoy adding suspense to "His" dilima. Maybe he wants us to "catch him if we can"?

If this is "his case" profile i will have to agree with public opinion.

P.I. Trainee
Flora Porter

Brenda Templin

08-11-2004, 07:33 PM

Steve, that was my first thought. Maybe it is all a game to him. I do think he "enjoys" it.

A little off subject, but when they show a close up of his face, if you cover his mouth, he looks like my ex did when we got married way back when. :eek: Even the teeth are close, but the mouth and chin are different. LOL

Brenda

Julie Mercer -

08-12-2004, 07:18 AM

Now he says his favorite movie is "The Shining", a movie about a man that goes nuts and tries to kill his wife!! Geez.....
Brenda,
I know, I heard that too! I keeps getting more Bizzzzzzzare. :eek:
Julie

Brenda Templin

08-12-2004, 11:06 AM

If not guilty, it is just beyond my level of comprehension as to how he could just go off fishing and act as if nothing had happened.

When my 13-year-old and her best friend were missing for three days, I was beside myself. I lived in a small town and made 4 or 5 trips a day to the police station talking to any officer who would listen. If I wasn't there, I was on the phone calling all her friends and their parents or driving around searching for them. I could not sleep or eat. It is impossible to describe the feeling.

He is either guilty or a sociopath, or both.

As Dr. Robert Hare, the noted Canadian researcher on the phychopathic personality, pointed out in his book,

Sociopaths are characterized by a disregard for social obligation and a lack of concern for the feelings of others. They display pathological egocentricity, shallow emotions, lack of insight, poor control of impulsiveness (including a low tolerance for frustration and a low threshold for discharge of aggression), irresponsibility, a lack of empathy for other human beings and of remorse, anxiety or guilt in relation to his/her antisocial behavior. They are usually callous, manipulative individuals, incapable of lasting friendship and of love. They shamelessly lie, cheat, steal, abuse, neglect their relatives and families, and endanger themselves and other people in a reckless manner. Hare characterizes them as "intraspecies predators who use charm, manipulation, intimidation, and violence to control others and to satisfy their own selfish needs. Lacking in conscience and in feelings for others, they cold-bloodedly take what they want and do as they please, violating social norms and expectations without the slightest sense of guilt or regret."

Brenda

Julie Mercer -

08-12-2004, 12:41 PM

He is either guilty or a sociopath, or both. As Dr. Robert Hare, the noted Canadian researcher on the phychopathic personality, pointed out in his book,
BOTH!!!!!!!!!! :(

Denise Damazio

08-12-2004, 01:35 PM

Brenda,

In my opinion he is guilty. If he isn't guilty, why don't his attorneys hire a PI to find the real killer??

I can't imagine anyone going away fishing when they find out there loved one is missing... that is beyond me.

I don't understand why people are killing there spouses just because they don't want to be married anymore. I say, just get a divorce!

It's a crazy world we live in... :eek:

Brenda Templin

08-19-2004, 10:31 AM

Until coming to IPIU, I had not really followed the Peterson case closely, but over the last few days I have searched and read everything I could find on the case.

Scott obviously has no morals, among other things, but I am no longer leaning toward guilty. But I am not leaning toward innocent either.

So Steve, I'm with you...back on the fence. I guess we are in the minority here, so don't fall off that limb and squash me! :eek:

Monday should be interesting when the trial resumes. I've read dozens of speculations as to why the trial was postponed. Anyone here have any thoughts on why?

Brenda

Lisa Frye -

08-19-2004, 08:53 PM

My gut tells me guilty but as I follow the case....I must say I have to see solid evidence. How can one leave his pregnant wife on Christmas eve?....well, trust me...it happens...dont make you a killer!!

Anyway...my gut tells me one thing but...So did my gut on the OJ trial and look what happened there!

Edward Ruebensam

08-20-2004, 07:32 AM

I am leaning toward guilty. The taped conversations between Scott and his then girlfriend Faye. But I believe that after all the evidence is introduced into court can you make a final dicision of "Guilty or Not Guilty"

This is only my 2 cents.

Amalia Martinelli

08-26-2004, 12:43 PM

I definitely agree that Scott is guilty. He is a very sick man. He had a beautiful wife, a child on the way. He threw it all away just to satisfy his itch. He's an idiot and he deserves what he's going to get. :)

Michael Harris

08-26-2004, 02:11 PM

... He is a very sick man. He had a beautiful wife, a child on the way. He threw it all away just to satisfy his itch. He's an idiot and he deserves what he's going to get. :)
Amalia,

Well said. You summed it up in four little sentences.

Pamela Penny

08-27-2004, 08:45 AM

I think he is guilty.

Robin M Ellefsen

09-17-2004, 08:01 AM

Peterson is guilty. He went fishing to dispose of the body and hopefully use it as an alibi. Unfortunately for him he figured the body would get washed out to sea or eaten by the marine life not pushed back to shore.....major miscalculation there.....

Also, he was calling his girl friend constantly while everyone else was looking for his wife? Guilty! Why not divorce? Probably didnt want to pay child support for 18 years. Motive for murder? Wanted to be with Amber Frye not his wife. Ya never know, he may not have wanted a baby in the first place regardless of what everyone says. Noone will ever know what he was thinking. But he definately did it, hopefully the courts will find the same results.

Gary Eads

09-17-2004, 08:11 AM

I too think Scott Peterson is guilty, however, they have yet to directly connect him to the murder. I have been following this for the most part, and on the court channel the attorneys mostly agree that he could be aquitted, remember OJ. I personally hope he is convicted and gets the death penality.

Michael Harris

09-17-2004, 08:43 AM

Robin,

I can understand a man wanting to be rid of his wife, but to kill just to avoid paying alimony and child support is beyond my understanding.

Melinda Mclendon

09-17-2004, 10:09 AM

By LAW they say we are all innocent until proven guilty, however I feel that guilty is weighing very heavy on the Scott Peterson side. I recall hearing it on the news when she was first missing. It hurt my stomach; it was a strange feeling that I seem to get whenever things aren’t right. Like when the last pregnant woman was shot to death while her and the husband was so-called (car jack). Come to find out he did it and she was eight months pregnant. If it was for insurance money he never received it because he killed his self. My guess is he couldn’t take the quilt on his shoulders. I agree with Brenda on Scott Peterson being a Psychopath because he seems to hold fast to the belief that it is all a conspiracy. In my opinion there was only circumstantial evidence at first glance so it made it hard to say but now things are coming to light is the whole story with the GPS Expert and forensic pathologist as an expert witnesses. Well I guess we just have to keep watching.

Melinda Mclendon
Badge # (work in progress)

Michael Harris

09-17-2004, 10:12 AM

[FONT=Comic Sans MS][COLOR=Navy]By LAW they say we are all innocent until proven guilty, however I feel that guilty is weighing very heavy on the Scott Peterson side. ...
Melinda,

You are right, but Scott just looks and smells SO guilty. Even if he avoids his just punishment on earth, there is still the afterlife he needs to fear.

Frederick Budde

09-17-2004, 10:46 AM

Denise Damazio

09-17-2004, 03:33 PM

The whole thing just turns my stomach. How anyone could do that to his own wife and child is beyond me. I think he is "guilty". He needs to be put away for a long time....

Denise

Denise Garceau

09-17-2004, 05:07 PM

I think he did something too, but so far they have no evidence, none. It also looks like there is evidence that there was someone else that could have done it. And if the Jurors are instructed correctly and have half a brain, you cannot find a person guilty just cause you think they did it...you need REAL evidence.

Vickie Berg

09-17-2004, 05:40 PM

I would love to be one of the investigators on this case!!
I know there is evidence someplace that proves he is guilty.
:mad:

Pamela Sue Hoyer Brussel -

09-17-2004, 05:46 PM

I agree with severalof you on the fact that this man is guilty. I do beleive he is one of those who think I can get the insurance and if I cant have them no one will adittude.

Vernon Jackson

09-17-2004, 05:53 PM

I think a couple of things. First, I agree that he appears to be a psychopath. Since day one he has not shown any remorse, did weird things like dye his hair and grow a goatee, did not appear to be worried or upset about his wife being missing, etc... And second, I believe Geragos is really stretching when he puts forth the theory that the baby was born and then killed later. A professional doctor witness has explained all of the technical details as to why this can't be true. Although there is no evidence yet to prove he killed his wife, I believe he probably did it. There's been nothing, zilch, no leads or motive for anyone else doing it. But even if he didn't do it, he will still be found guilty by the jury because of his lack of emotion, weird behavior, the Frye relationship and all the incredible fantasy theories Geragos is presenting.

Pamela Sue Hoyer Brussel -

09-17-2004, 06:08 PM

Vernon
That is very true and I do agree with you on this issue.

Denise Garceau

09-17-2004, 06:55 PM

Denise Garceau

09-17-2004, 06:56 PM

Another thing, I have seen judges NULL a jury verdict because it was so ridiculous and obvious they did not understand their job when there was no evidence.

Pamela Sue Hoyer Brussel -

09-18-2004, 07:14 AM

agreed.

Vernon Jackson

09-18-2004, 07:23 AM

If hes found guilty just because morons on a jury don't like his demeanor, there will be no problem with an appeal.

How intelligent can a reasonable person be to find someone guilty just because they don't like their personality?

These are a jury of peers? **** I hope I never have to go before a jury of idiots.

Denise,

I'm not saying I would agree with the jury or that it's right if he got convicted if he's not guilty - I'm just saying that all of the weird things the defense is doing, in addition to Peterson's behavior, is hurting his case. A jury will make their determination based on the credibility of the issues put before them. And yes, then there would probably be an appeal.

Gary Eads

09-18-2004, 07:55 AM

Michael Harris

09-18-2004, 11:14 AM

Gary,

I think everybody knows that Scott is guilty. The proof is not strong, but there is enough evidence if the prosecution can piece it together well enough.

I am betting that Scott is found not guilty because some key piece of evidence was barred by the judge because of some technicality.

We have to keep in mind that in law, there is Guilty and Not Guilty; there is no Innocent. Innocence can never be proved. Regardless of the final verdict, Scott will never be free of the aura of Guilt surrounding him.

Scott Peterson and Susan Smith may be made for each other.

Jon Leuck

09-18-2004, 11:23 AM

He has already been convicted through the media, let's see what the court system finds, Jon Leuck.

Michael Harris

09-18-2004, 12:26 PM

Jon,

I do not have statistical evidence, just anecdotal evidence, that when a high-profile case clearly points to the guilt of the accused, the trial goes badly and the perp walks.

Part of the problem is the media.

Osmond McMahon

09-18-2004, 01:40 PM

I haven't really followed this case very much. I have heard of bits and pieces of evidence and such to be submitted. At this point, I believe he did it....but I guess we will jst have to wait and see how well the prosecution presents their evidence and makes their case....

Sandra R McGeorge -

09-18-2004, 08:03 PM

"From a Criminal Justice graduate..."

Scott Peterson is a CLASSIC example of a sociopath... He can walk around as if nothing is wrong, because he doesn't feel as though anything is wrong! They are incapable of feeling the same things we feel...
And Amber Fry's baby is from her new boyfriend (a doctor, I believe!)

Frederick Budde

09-20-2004, 06:38 AM

Chanda Freeman

09-23-2004, 10:08 AM

I think many of you have brought up valid points and additional questions. I hadn't heard of the previous girlfriend that had disappeared - was this ever validated? Scott's behavior is suspicious, of course, because most of us have emotions, and he seems to be devoid of such. Also his actions immediately following reporting her missing are questionable, as they are not the actions that most of us would take. The idea that he was planning a future with Ms Frye, while telling her he was a widower, causes concern.

The problem seems to be in the evidence. As with OJ, I fear that Scott may, as Heather put it, get off Scott-free. The only justice is that he will never escape the stain he placed on himself when he dyed his hair and headed for Mexico with ample funds to hide for awhile.

Julie Mercer -

09-23-2004, 01:25 PM

The only justice is that he will never escape the stain he placed on himself when he dyed his hair and headed for Mexico with ample funds to hide for awhile.
Chanda,
The thing about pathological liars is, they don't care! I fear that is the condition Scott Peterson is living with. He has some severe problems and he will probably never get help. Personally, I wish the guilt would break him & eat him alive!
Julie

Sandra R McGeorge -

09-23-2004, 01:27 PM

At first, I thought he was REAL stupid... I mean, you just DON'T give TV interviews like he did! But so far, they have been unable to produce "the smoking gun" (the PHYSICAL evidence that links him to the crime.)

SO, he can't be THAT stupid!

However, the CIRCUMSTANTIAL evidence is overwhelming. It will be VERY INTERESTING to see how the jury sees it. I mean, he was in San Diego (with hair dyed blonde, a beard, $10K in cash and a bunch of VIAGRA!?!?!?) when his wife and child were discovered.

HE DIDN'T EVEN BOTHER TO CONTACT THE AUTHORITIES WHEN THE BODIES WERE FOUND! :eek:

HELLO???? What's wrong with THIS picture?

Lori A Marshall

09-24-2004, 11:21 AM

I have followed this case from the beginning, reading transcripts of the preliminary hearings as well as each day of the trial. First, I must say that the media coverage has been so pro-prosecution that I cannot believe they are allowed to report some of the erroneous information they have. It's really no wonder public opinion is what it is toward Scott Peterson. This case is so heartbreaking; what seemed like the perfect marriage ends like this.

Some of the circumstantial evidence presented is certainly damning, however, I feel the defense has done a good job demonstrating there is more to the story than has been told. I am waiting to hear all the evidence from both sides before making a decision. If I had to render a verdict today, I would say not guilty simply based on the lack of compelling evidence presented to this point. I'm open to the belief that Scott may indeed have done this, however, I don't feel it has been fully proven or disproven at this point.

One pressing question I feel needs to be answered is how did Deanna Renfrow obtain the Croton watch she pawned less than a week after Laci's disappearance? Her brother Donnie Renfrow has the mysterious van that has been tied to this case time and time again. They do indicate they "cleared" Mr. Renfrow, but I feel that it may have been an easy "clear" since I really do believe they felt Scott was responsible. If this turns out to be Laci's watch that was pawned, how did this lady get it and why did she go back to the pawn shop less than a week later to retrieve it? People are very quick to look at the circumstances of Scott's behavior and dismiss other questions that should be answered in my opinion. Is the fact that this lady had a Croton watch similar to Laci's and the fact that she and her brother were living out of this van that was seen in the area simply coinsidence that should be dismissed because the husband is a liar and cheater? I'm not sure that any of our personal lives could withstand the intense pressure and scrutiny that Scott Peterson faced; every word and action analyzed and twisted. I do not in any way condone his behavior and dishonesty, please don't misunderstand, but I want to see more probative evidence. There are so many important discrepancies in what the transcripts show the testimony was and what the media reports, its really opened my eyes and I want to know more.

I'm keeping an open mind until I hear all the evidence and not letting my emotions get in the way. I want someone to pay for the gross injustice done to this beautiful woman and her child, but I want it to be the guilty person.

Freddy Reyes

09-24-2004, 11:31 AM

I have to say I also agree,but whatever the motive was I still think the outcome could've been avoided.If he in fact was unhappy,he should've just left,no hard feelings.His wife and child would still be alive today and he would not be where he is either.

Terri Young

09-24-2004, 11:43 AM

IOne pressing question I feel needs to be answered is how did Deanna Renfrow obtain the Croton watch she pawned less than a week after Laci's disappearance? Her brother Donnie Renfrow has the mysterious van that has been tied to this case time and time again. They do indicate they "cleared" Mr. Renfrow, but I feel that it may have been an easy "clear" since I really do believe they felt Scott was responsible. If this turns out to be Laci's watch that was pawned, how did this lady get it and why did she go back to the pawn shop less than a week later to retrieve it?

Lori,

I agree with you there. I think there is more to the story and the police and all investigators have stopped looking because Scott cheated and lied. I believe there might have been others who helped Scott or he paid them to get ride of his wife.

I guess we will never know the real story.

Brenda Templin

09-24-2004, 08:24 PM

Lori,

I was leaning toward guilty until I went back and read everything from the beginning, and began following it on a daily basis. The points you made are the exact things that keep running through my mind, and is why I am on the fence.

The prosecution has not yet shown me enough to say he is guilty.

Brenda

Sidney J Jolly -

09-25-2004, 07:46 AM

A case with heavy circumstantial evidence, and no physical evidence. The jury's decision is going to come down to whether to convict on circumstantial evidence alone.

Flora Porter

10-10-2004, 07:32 AM

LACI PETERSON CASE
__________________
On tv (USA) today
9am to 11am

I'll let you know about the movie

Gary Eads

10-10-2004, 11:09 AM

I think Scott is guilty, however, they have never connected him to the murder. And as a result I think he will be found not guilty. Amber was the bomb they claimed she would be. The prosucuters failed to make their case, the police did a poor job during the investigation. Just my opinion.

Flora Porter

10-10-2004, 11:27 AM

I think Scott is guilty also, however, they have yet too connect him to the murder. And he should not be found guilty because he does'nt cry. I followed the OJ murder he sould have gotten an academy award for his preformance, and I think we can all agree that he's guilty.I too want Scott to be found guilty, but they need to present some direct evidence that connect him to the murder, and so far I don't think they have, just my opinion.
Hi Gary,

I saw Laci story today on 'usa'.
Scott Peterson behaved as we see him
in the court. No shame. No sympathy. No show of any feelings.

We all want to know why did he go fishing when she was reported missing?

He and his lawyer have a tungue tied defense going for them.
Scott did break down and cried in church in the movie.

Laci's mother and brother want justice for Laci :cool:

Scott was behind bars when show ended.
He was wearing his jailhouse gear. In his catch me if you can disguise.

Flora