Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Which felons should not be believed? Todd and Pearce who say they robbed the Medina home on the 26th? Adam Tenbrink who said Todd approached him on Christmas Eve about participating in a burglary?
I'd like a new trial, too. I think the Prosecution would still prevail but with more clarity.
Please provide a link to the quote you keep referencing regarding Adam Tenbrink.
This doesn't make sense. Of course the police should not have just taken the burglars' word that they robbed the place on the 26th and not on the 24th. A witness, Diane Jackson called 911 to report a burglary in process at the Medina home after seeing men with a safe in the front yard on the 24th. The neighborhood was swarming with both police and media on the 26th and you really find it believable that the men burglarized he Medina home on that day because that's what they told police?
Where are you getting the following quote from "Todd approached him on the evening of Dec. 24 about participating in a burglary," which was after Laci went missing. That's not an official quote from any source you know.
I do not believe the police just took Todd and Pearce's word. They investigated it and did not find any connection between the van Diane Jackson saw on the 24th and the car Pearce had access to on the 26th.
There is a serious question as to when Diane Jackson mentioned "safe", so this shouldn't be used as a sticking point. From reading my previous comments about Jackson, I believe what she saw was likely landscapers, not at all relevant to Laci's disappearance, and got the impression she (Jackson) thought she was being heroic by creating drama out of nothing significant.
I've heavily considered the media presence on the 26th and admitted it seemed unbelievable at first it could have happened at that time. However, a burglary happening right across the street was the last thing media was looking for. Ted Rowlands insists no one was there. I'm not certain. Do I think Todd and Pearce just walked out at sunrise carrying the safe exposed? I doubt that. There are just details we don't know about how this was done. But while you may think the 26th is an impossibility, I think criminals gambled that the media was too focused on Laci, and therefore were able to maneuver away without being noticed.
As FleaT quoted from Scott's appeal:
"Defense investigator Jensen located Adam Tenbrink who stated that
he and Todd were close friends and that Todd approached Adam on the
evening of December 24, 2002, about helping him with a burglary that
'was already started.'"
Does this mean Todd had already been to the Medina home, left, and was attempting to recruit Adam to go back with him? Or, is it more likely, the investigator cleverly worded that to make it sound that way?
I know you like referencing PWC Consulting which is designed to defend Scott.
I believe he's guilty but this whole case that put Scott in jail is based on maybe's.
Between 1999-2002 within a hundred mile radius of Modesto, 7 pregnant women went missing. Two have been found, Laci Peterson and Evelyn Hernandez, she was found in the SanFran Bay in August 2002.
It really dosnt sound like you think he's guilty...
Judges hate "maybe's" they like facts. Unless the lawyers for Scott can come up with something more solid on evidence he's innocent I don't see him getting another trial. But hey I've been wrong before and a retrial would be very interesting. Maybe Scott will show some emotion this time instead of sitting there like a bored psychopath
I do not believe the police just took Todd and Pearce's word. They investigated it and did not find any connection between the van Diane Jackson saw on the 24th and the car Pearce had access to on the 26th.
There is a serious question as to when Diane Jackson mentioned "safe", so this shouldn't be used as a sticking point. From reading my previous comments about Jackson, I believe what she saw was likely landscapers, not at all relevant to Laci's disappearance, and got the impression she (Jackson) thought she was being heroic by creating drama out of nothing significant.
I've heavily considered the media presence on the 26th and admitted it seemed unbelievable at first it could have happened at that time. However, a burglary happening right across the street was the last thing media was looking for. Ted Rowlands insists no one was there. I'm not certain. Do I think Todd and Pearce just walked out at sunrise carrying the safe exposed? I doubt that. There are just details we don't know about how this was done. But while you may think the 26th is an impossibility, I think criminals gambled that the media was too focused on Laci, and therefore were able to maneuver away without being noticed.
As FleaT quoted from Scott's appeal:
"Defense investigator Jensen located Adam Tenbrink who stated that
he and Todd were close friends and that Todd approached Adam on the
evening of December 24, 2002, about helping him with a burglary that
'was already started.'"
Does this mean Todd had already been to the Medina home, left, and was attempting to recruit Adam to go back with him? Or, is it more likely, the investigator cleverly worded that to make it sound that way?
I know you like referencing PWC Consulting which is designed to defend Scott.
You believe that the police conducted a full investigation to determine that the burglary occurred on the 26th and not on the 24th. I don't believe that they did. What evidence do we have that shows that it occurred on the 24th and what evidence do we have that it occurred on the 26th?
I've never seen a landscaping van that holds all of it's equipment inside without a trailer. I also can't imagine driving around in a vehicle that has functioning lawn mowers inside of it. The smell of gas would be overwhelming.
You're quoting another poster, can you share a link to that quote in the appeal so that we can read it in it's full context. Thanks.
I quote from sources where I can find direct links to either trial testimony or witness statements. I don't know if Scott is innocent or guilty. I'm interested in looking at the case with an open and objective mind.
Last edited by MissTerri; 09-20-2017 at 03:25 PM..
Ok. Went back and read it. That's one quote from the appeal but it certainly leaves out quite a bit. I suggest you take the time to read it yourself if you haven't already.
Some other quotes:
Quote:
The defense motion alleged that inmate Shawn Tenbrink had a phone conversation with his brother Adam about a month after Laci's disappearance. In that conversation, Adam told Shawn that "Laci walked up on Stephen Todd while he was burglarizing the house next door and that he had verbally threatened her." (20CT 6255)37
Quote:
I listened to this recording and heard Adam Tenbrink tell Shawn Tenbrink something about the Laci Peterson case. Adam said he was told by someone, presumably Steven Todd as his name was mentioned during the call, that Laci Peterson had seen Todd and others committing a burglary in the neighborhood.
Quote:
RECEIVED INFO FROM SHAWN TENBRINK (INMATE) HE SPOKE TO BROTHER ADAM WHO SAID STEVE TODD SAID LACI WITNESSED HIM BREAKING IN. COULD NOT GIVE DATES OR TIME.'
Ok, I've seen your framework for what you refer to as reasonable doubt. Now, how about your version of, "If he's guilty..."? If he killed Laci, how would you reconcile the discrepancies of everything from Amy Rocha on the 23rd, to Graybill at 10:30 AM+, and even to three (3) dark-skinned (Hispanic or Asian) men with a dolly by a van at 11:40 AM?
Switch from Defense to Prosecution for a moment and take a jab at this.
I have no idea what to think if Graybill was right, what can you say, the dog opened the gate? Between that and the Aponte tip, would that cause reasonable doubt?
Nothing on Amy on the 23rd. .
The robbery is easy, Diane Jacksons tip never came to light in court, even Detective Steele in the documentary gave a huge gulp when he heard about it, read it, and said " yes it's relevant".
What we also know is Jackson called it in to a general tip line about the burglary, not about the Laci Peterson disappearance. MPD Press Release
She did not testify in court.
I'm not sure what to do about her timeline, she called it on the 26th or 27th ( the cops aren't even sure which) and that she saw a safe being removed. I also don't know why she didn't testify, unless of course the cops went with the 26th and that's just the way it is.
Now it's far too late to ask Jackson anything, she called it in, and the cops tossing her tip out like trash make it look like the only credible witnesses are on the side of the defense, that's blatanty obvious.
If Graybills info is in the latest appeal to the Cali Supreme Court, I would have him subpoenaed for a deposition to find out if the statement he gave police was true, and did he consider himself under oath. The defense shouldn't have a problem with that either. He is a federal employee, so on 12-27-03, I would think it was true.
If that can happen legally, plus taking Jacksons tip under consideration, who knows what might happen.
No matter what, all the eye witnesses that didnt testify don't matter in the eyes of the court so for anything to happen in this case, the court has to at least consider that when Scott left, Laci was still alive, and even with Graybill, you don't have that.
My opinion is too many people listen to Nance Grace, who had Scott convicted before being tried. And listening to what that fool had to say is ludicrous. Whether he is guilty or not, I'm not sure. I hope the repeal goes through and a lot of the evidence not allowed is brought forward, and a new trial due to the one lying juror.
Let a fair trail and muffle Grace.
Here's a question which may just prove issues with our jury system;
Does Casey Anthony's jury find Scott Peterson innocent? Whether you think she covered up an accident, Caylee Anthony was found with duct tape around her mouth area. Also someone searched quick suffocation techniques, Casey Anthony led police on a wild goose chase around Orlando, taking them to her place of work, even though she didn't work there, lol, she lied about a nanny abducting Caylee as well.
In a death penalty case maybe professional jurors need to be used.
It really dosnt sound like you think he's guilty...
Judges hate "maybe's" they like facts. Unless the lawyers for Scott can come up with something more solid on evidence he's innocent I don't see him getting another trial. But hey I've been wrong before and a retrial would be very interesting. Maybe Scott will show some emotion this time instead of sitting there like a bored psychopath
I do think he's guilty, but anyone like me can poke holes into an investigation. If you delve into our constitution, it's kind of big deal in terms of fair trials. What I'm doing is pointing out serious discrepancies of police involved in this case. The first time any of us are accused of something, you would hope that someone out there has your back.
Steve Avery sat in jail for 17 years for a rape he didn't commit, he was there because he's poor, things like that shouldn't happen to anyone.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
