Scott Peterson: Guilty or Innocent?

[S10000]

With the recent delay of the trial, I decided to inquire your guy's opinions on the case. Do you believe Scott Peterson is innocent of the crimes he is being tried for? Personally I feel he is guilty. The evidence found ices over any doubt I had of his innocence.

Here's a timeline connecting Scott and Laci Peterson along with Amber Frey. http://www.courttv.com/trials/peterson/flash_timeline.html

This trial has gone on long enough. Geragos keeps pushing it back and asking for delays. Unless this new evidence proves his innocence, I doubt Peterson will win.

CNN Article about the delay/New Evidence. http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/08/05/scott.peterson.case/index.html

[Fossil]

I'm not sure who killed Laci Peterson, but I don't think it was her husband, Scott Peterson. There's no motive, or evidence linking him to her death. They got nothing.

Who knows, but the Russian mob is huge in the bay area and they're into extortion amongst other things. Maybe he owed them some money and when he couldn't pay up they kidnapped Laci...

[Golom]

Yeah i voted i'm not sure, becaues...well i'm not sure. All the evidence doesnt nessearlily point to her husband. Though at the same time I fish and i know what i am fishing for. But at the same time i dont know how i would react to being slammed with questions after my wife died. Who knows, i hope he didnt do it.

[Star]

Scott Peterson is guilty as sin, stupid as hell and somebody's punk in jail. Everything he has done points to guilt. He's a womanizing liar and certainly did NOT want children to interfere with his evil ways. If Mark Garagos helps him go free, he is just as guilty as Scott is.

[Jay-Z]

Scott Peterson is guilty as sin, stupid as hell and somebody's punk in jail. Everything he has done points to guilt. He's a womanizing liar and certainly did NOT want children to interfere with his evil ways. If Mark Garagos helps him go free, he is just as guilty as Scott is.

What makes you feel so strongly? His womanizing or the actual evidence?

[Star]

What makes you feel so strongly? His womanizing or the actual evidence? The actual evidence. I read the whole entire case and timeline. He's done. He did some really stupid things, like making the five cement anchors, four of which are missing. They have an eye witness who saw him with something wrapped up in a tarp in the back of his boat. God, there are too many things to list. Not to mention, he told Amber Frey that he didn't kill Laci but he knew who did. :rolleyes: I watched several interviews and his body language tells on him. He's guilty as hell.

[Golom]

The actual evidence. I read the whole entire case and timeline. He's done. He did some really stupid things, like making the five cement anchors, four of which are missing. They have an eye witness who saw him with something wrapped up in a tarp in the back of his boat. God, there are too many things to list. Not to mention, he told Amber Frey that he didn't kill Laci but he knew who did. :rolleyes: I watched several interviews and his body language tells on him. He's guilty as hell.

This is why Star is a badass Cop!

[RebelliousYouth]

That motherfucker is guilty. And he does have a motive. He was having an affair with Amber Whats-Her-Name and Laci found out and was going to leave him. He went physco and killed her. All the evidence points to him.

[minia]

Not to mention the fact that he gave his girlfriend some of Laci's jewelry.....maybe he knew she wouldn't need it anymore?? Don't these people watch Law and Order???

[vchampionl70]

Well, we'll certainly find out some more information tomorrow when Amber Fry testifies. As of right now, and unless Amber testifies on his behalf, he could only appear more guilty if guilty were painted smack in the middle of his forehead.

After all, as Scott said, "I didn't kill her, but I know who did." Who Scott?

[dead]

how can you make a dessision on these facts and how do you know these facts are true haven't seen any visible evidence
maybe it was amber look just at the place they met it was near disneyland.
maybe scot wanted back to his wife and amber didn't take that and killed her
look like the story on the timeline is all made by amber

[dead]

That motherfucker is guilty. And he does have a motive. He was having an affair with Amber Whats-Her-Name and Laci found out and was going to leave him. He went physco and killed her. All the evidence points to him.
what evidence ?

[droogsteve]

I love Scott peterson's statement when the police told him they were searching for his newly missing wife in the park: "So, you're using cadaver dogs?"

Wouldn't be MY first reaction.

And of course there's the "fishing trip". On Christmas eve, the DAY SHE DISAPPEARS, he suddenly decides to drive three hours to San Francisco bay on a shitty rainy day for the first time to fish by himself. In a unbelieveably shocking coincidence, his wife's body is later found in the very same place. :eek: :eek: :eek:

Then before his wife's body is found, he sells her car, dies his hair blond and grows a beard. When the cops grab him he has his brother's ID and $9500, the maximum amount you are allowed to take into Mexico without being questioned.

I'm thinking: GUILTY!!

[Bajee]

I think hes guilty because thats the general impression his made for TV movie on TBS left me with.

[Karajan]

Do I THINK he's guilty? Yes.

Is there enough evidence to prove him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in court? Probably not unless something else comes up.

[Scud]

Listen to T.V. and it's biased opinion. Its sad how in a court of law, T.V. decides the truth, not what actually happens in the court room. Want a good example?

OJ Simpson

T.V. says "He's guilty"
Court Room Jurors say "He's not guilty"
People say "He's guilty"

Only people who know almost the whole truth are those within the courtroom.

[Bubba-E]

you need one more choice s10

"i dont give a fuck"

half the polls i have seen that ask people if they care are in favor of people who dont care, some like 70 some % to 20 sum %

ya, it sucks that the crime happened, but theres so much about it.. its starting to get anoying, theres even a TV movie about it, i think its a movie it might be a mini-series, not sure, because I DONT CARE!!!

[pat99872]

you need one more choice s10

"i dont give a fuck"

half the polls i have seen that ask people if they care are in favor of people who dont care, some like 70 some % to 20 sum %

ya, it sucks that the crime happened, but theres so much about it.. its starting to get anoying, theres even a TV movie about it, i think its a movie it might be a mini-series, not sure, because I DONT CARE!!!
if you don't care why are you replying then? take your garbage somewhere else

and yes.. he's guilty of course.. its so damn obvious, there are evidents to prove it

[vchampionl70]

Listen to T.V. and it's biased opinion. Its sad how in a court of law, T.V. decides the truth, not what actually happens in the court room. Want a good example?

OJ Simpson

T.V. says "He's guilty"
Court Room Jurors say "He's not guilty"
People say "He's guilty"

Only people who know almost the whole truth are those within the courtroom.

So you actually believe Simpson was innocent?

[Scud]

I'm saying I am not the one allowed to pass judgement because I could only base my info on a biased media. I'll believe what the court jurors believe since they were there every second of the trial, hearing all the testimony and have a broader interpertation of what is really happening. Were you in courtroom? did you hear every single piece of testimony and followed every part of the case? EVERY part? T.V. is edited for a reason, to show their message and to summarize their views. Why would the jurors say he's innocent if the trial showed he was guilty from what you saw on T.V.?

[bbyroo1]

I have just spent about 6 hours of a 12 hour (unusually quiet ems shift) pouring over Peterson trial information. Well hey, it gives me something to do besides sleep! Anyway, I really thought he was guilty at first just based on the media coverage I watched. But after reading transcripsts, witnesses who were poorly handled by the police, autopsy findings, etc. I have changed my mind. Is Peterson a cad, a cheat, a liar? Yes. But a murderer, I don't think so. The biggest thing I found that makes me want to smack the modesto police det's in the head is the drug user who a month earlier stole personal checks with scot and laci's home information printed on them. Although she was interviewed, police did not followup. This woman was stealing the checks for an asian gang in order to get meth. On top of that, she had a miscarriage a month prior to Laci's disapperance, and was not taking the loss of her child well. Makes ya wonder. Plus, the sheer stupidness and flat out lies that lead invest. of the medesto police told on the witness stand makes me wonder why he's not on suspension from the dept. :eek: I know you can come back with alot of circumst. evidence, but it's explainable evidence for the most part. Just my thoughts.

[droogsteve]

The biggest thing I found that makes me want to smack the modesto police det's in the head is the drug user who a month earlier stole personal checks with scot and laci's home information printed on them. Although she was interviewed, police did not followup. Yeah, that makes sense. Because when junkies kill during burglaries, they always clean up the crime scene, wrap the body, drive it 100 miles, take it out on a boat that they happen to have, weight it down and dump it. And in an astounding coincidence, they just happen to dump it in the very same spot that Scott claimed to be fishing in that day. :eek: :rolleyes:

Yeah, I know sarcasm is the lowest form of wit. But I feel that in this case it's called for. :D

[bbyroo1]

Yeah, that makes sense. Because when junkies kill during burglaries, they always clean up the crime scene, wrap the body, drive it 100 miles, take it out on a boat that they happen to have, weight it down and dump it. And in an astounding coincidence, they just happen to dump it in the very same spot that Scott claimed to be fishing in that day. :eek: :rolleyes:

Yeah, I know sarcasm is the lowest form of wit. But I feel that in this case it's called for. :D

I agree with what you just wrote if what you were saying had factual basis. The only problem with it is this: the "exonerating evidence" that will come out shortly has to do with that fact that Laci was not weighted down with concrete as the modesto police stated. And they knew this as they were the ones to take away the evidence, and admitted to buring any evidence and not showing it to the defense if it would give Scott an alibi or help his case. Plus, the less then pebble size piece of concrete they found in Scott and Laci's house was not found in the room the det. originally claimed, but in a room where they (the same det's) have proven masonary work was done a few months BEFORE Laci was missing. Again, the det's lied. I never said that during the burglary, which took place at the complex Scott worked, not at their house, was also the same time Laci was killed. The theft occured approx a month prior to Laci missing and was reported to police by Laci and Scott. Also, Laci was witnessed the morning of her dissapperance walking her dog, as Scott had stated. As far as the tarp, which is what I think you are referring to with the wrapping her body... that was disproved. The tarp was actually used to catch gasoline that was leaking from a lawn mower, and not one shred of DNA evidence was found of Laci's on either tarp.
So, that leaves us with Scott acting like an ass. Here's my theory on that:
1. Scott didn't really care that Laci was missing or possibly dead. 2. Scott's family gave him money, passport, etc. to get him out of the country until they found the killer because they knew and arrest was immanent and that their son was looking at a death sentence. 3. the killer saw the high profile case as it was being reported, and put laci and conner into the water in the area where scott had been fishing. (Even a complete retard would not place himself AT the crime scene).
In truth, only one person right now know's what happened for sure, and she is resting in peace now. I am only giving my opionion on the facts that I have read, heard, seen and watched. Again, I went into this thinking Scott was guilty as sin. Now I think Scott is pond scum, but innocent of murder.

[Tucker1616]

He's guilty. It's just obvious by the way he acts, in an interview he pretended to be crying when he obviously was faking it. He keeps changing his stories too.

you need one more choice s10

"i dont give a fuck"

half the polls i have seen that ask people if they care are in favor of people who dont care, some like 70 some % to 20 sum %

ya, it sucks that the crime happened, but theres so much about it.. its starting to get anoying, theres even a TV movie about it, i think its a movie it might be a mini-series, not sure, because I DONT CARE!!! So you think they should just stop the search for the murderer and let a guilty man run free?

[jnelson17]

Hey Scud,

With regard to the Peterson trial, TV is not biased. Some of the "pundits" on
the talkshows maybe but they are on OPINION shows.

As to you example about the OJ trial. The entire trial was televised so your point that the jurors were the only ones who saw everything is "moot" (look it up). Actually people outside the trial had even more information than the jurors and also had the liberty of discussing it with many people.

I think you might be one of those "I don't know nothing about no DNA" people.
That's what one of the OJ jurors was quoted saying to the media.

Are you really that stupid?

Jeff Nelson
jnelson17@verizon.net

[bobby987654]

:( Justice has been made a mockery of in Redwood City, California as 12 jurors handed down an unmerited verdict based entirely upon circumstantial evidence and robustly inconsistent with equal justice under law. Let it be known to all pundits that the fight is not over. People who know the truth and believe in justice will continue to be consumed by the cry of the innocence of Scott Peterson and will forever rally in his defense. I pray for comfort in the family of Scott Peterson and call for the reawakening of the spirit of hope as this case is taken to the appellate level. I implore the wisdom of the judges who shall soon take on this appeal and decide the future of the life and liberty of Scott Peterson. May the search continue for the true accomplices in this murder so that Laci and Connor Peterson may be peacefully put to rest. God Bless Scott Peterson and all those who defend him in the Halls of Justice.

[dslman]

i really dont pay much attention to this trial. I dont get it, theres thousands of murders in the u.s every year, and alot are much worst than this case...so why does the media concentrate on this particular one? how did this whole peterson craze get started

[Ace Hippie]

In some cases, circumstantial evidence is supposed to be considered with the same weight as one would consider actual factual/tangible evidence. I don't necessarily agree with that, but the amount of evidence against Peterson was pretty damning just by browsing some of the trial overviews. It's not like they took one bit of evidence, they had a boatload.

[tophizzle]

Does it really matter? It dosent affect me at all so I could care less

[krazykomrade]

Yeah, I know sarcasm is the lowest form of wit.
WTF? Since when?