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.
Status:
"I don't understand. But I don't care, so it works out."
(set 3 days ago)
35,606 posts, read 17,935,039 times
Reputation: 50634
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by CA4Now
Whether he was an "avid fisherman" or not has nothing to do with anything. In the clip, it was stated somewhere in the first 20 minutes that he was going fishing 90 miles away.
It seems fairly clear that Peterson did not "wander off."
And would your husband have knowingly done that if you were 8 months pregnant with your first child and had plans for the late afternoon on Christmas Eve?
Well, yes. My husband only really worries about me when I'm away and he was taking care of the children. THEN, he was "worried sick" if I was 15 minutes longer than he expected me to be gone. Otherwise, if I had the kids with me, I don't know the length of time that would lapse before he'd wonder where we'd got to.
When I was 8 months pregnant I came home from work and went out on our upstairs back balcony and got locked out there. When he came home from work he didn't even bother looking for me. Just whatever, her car's in the garage, who knows where she got to. During the time I should have been fixing dinner. He couldn't hear me yelling and pounding but thought that was somewhere else, not our house. Geez. I had to yell to a neighbor in their backyard to please go ring my doorbell to tell my husband I was stuck on the balcony. By that time, it was a couple hours.
So. Yes. My husband ABSOLUTELY would have gone away for a day on a holiday, even if I was 8.5 months pregnant.
And I think that's just what you have to allow for, when you look at a murder trial. Not everyone is the same. Saying "well, no man would leave on Christmas eve with a pregnant wife". Yes, some men would.
And ninety miles is nothing. I drive to the beach sometimes, 3.5 hours away, spend the afternoon, and drive back home. Because I love to drive, and love to get away. Scott was clearly wanting escape - he was having an affair, now THAT's escape - and it's not surprising he'd drive 90 miles each way to escape for the day.
That needs to be put in context. (And frankly, it's bizarre to think that he--or anyone, for that matter--would head off on an HOURS LONG fishing trip on Christmas Eve, knowing that he and his wife had later plans with their family, but that's just IMO.)
The questions began mounting for Grantski – an avid fisherman who keeps a pole in his car – after Peterson said he left at 9:30 a.m. to go fishing in Berkeley the day his wife disappeared.
"I said, ‘9:30? That’s when I come home when I go,’" Grantski testified, recounting a conversation with Peterson Christmas Eve 2002 as a search was under way for his wife. "And he just turned around and walked away."
Ron Grantski(who also had later plans with the family) went fishing alone for hours through the afternoon of the 24th, just as Scott did. Unlike Scott though, Ron didn't buy a fishing license immediately prior or mention his plan to anyone beforehand. And rather than going to a busy marina like Scott did, Ron went to a secret fishing spot. Should we consider that evidence that Ron killed Laci? I mean, he went fishing alone on the day before Christmas and didn't even tell anyone. Who does that, right?
Ron Grantski(who also had later plans with the family) went fishing alone for hours through the afternoon of the 24th, just as Scott did. Unlike Scott though, Ron didn't buy a fishing license immediately prior or mention his plan to anyone beforehand. And rather than going to a busy marina like Scott did, Ron went to a secret fishing spot.
A secret spot? Do you have a link to transcripts? I can't find much on that.
REDWOOD CITY, Calif. – Though prosecutors in Scott Peterson's (search) double-murder trial have said that his Christmas Eve morning fishing trip seemed unusual, and was simply a cover-up to dispose of his wife's body, Laci Peterson's (search) stepfather acknowledged Tuesday that he, too, went fishing that morning.
"Almost exactly the time that Scott Peterson went, correct?" defense lawyer Mark Geragos (search) asked.
"That is correct. Ninety miles closer," Ron Grantski (search) replied tersely from the witness stand.
Scott secretly bought a boat on December 9. He told his girlfriend that his wife was dead.
On December 24 he loaded a pile of market umbrellas into the back of his truck and left his house around 9:30AM. He drove to his warehouse where he checked his email and assembled a woodworking tool. He did not go fishing at 9:30AM.
Later that day he drove 90 miles to the Marina where he put his aluminium boat into the water. He had the wrong gear for sturgeon fishing.
When he returned home, he ate pizza and did laundry. He phoned Sharon Rocha to tell her that Laci was missing. He told some neighbours that he was golfing during the day and later changed his story to fishing.
Scott's mother told him that even he was not so stupid as to put Laci in the ocean and tell police he was on the ocean when she disappeared.
The last time that anyone can confirm that Laci was alive was on the evening of December 23.
A secret spot? Do you have a link to transcripts? I can't find much on that.
REDWOOD CITY, Calif. – Though prosecutors in Scott Peterson's (search) double-murder trial have said that his Christmas Eve morning fishing trip seemed unusual, and was simply a cover-up to dispose of his wife's body, Laci Peterson's (search) stepfather acknowledged Tuesday that he, too, went fishing that morning.
"Almost exactly the time that Scott Peterson went, correct?" defense lawyer Mark Geragos (search) asked.
"That is correct. Ninety miles closer," Ron Grantski (search) replied tersely from the witness stand.
DISTASO: And on the 15th you took Sharon fishing. Where did you go?
GRANTSKI: There's, Oakdale. It's on Orange Blossom. I'm giving away my fishing spot.
DISTASO: I was going to say you don't need to give away your secret spot. But what I'm getting at, don't,
GRANTSKI: We went fishing in Oakdale.
Later, referring to the 24th:
GRANTSKI: Probably around 11:00, 11:30, 12:00. I wished everybody a Merry Christmas and said I would see them afterwards.
DISTASO: And then you left the job site. And on the way home did you do any fishing?
GRANTSKI: Yeah. I, I believe I called Sharon and, you know, that was a Tuesday. A lot of people had to kind of work part of the day or you had to get things ready, and I, I told her I was getting ready, and she said she was going to the show, I believe with Sandy, so I figured well, I've got a few hours, so I decided to drive and go fishing.
DISTASO: Okay. And did you go fishing at the same place in Oakdale where you had gone on the 15th?
GRANTSKI: Yes.
Later, on cross:
GERAGOS: Okay. Now, the, you had, Mr. Distaso had asked you some questions. You went fishing on Christmas, on December 24th, the same day?
GRANTSKI: Correct.
GERAGOS: Okay. And you went at what time?
GRANTSKI: Probably about, like I said, somewhere around 12:00, 12:30 in the afternoon.
GERAGOS: Almost exactly the time that Scott Peterson went fishing?
GRANTSKI: Correct.
GERAGOS: Okay. And,
GRANTSKI: 90 miles closer, but,
GERAGOS: It was closer to your work, but you were working that day, he wasn't, as far as you know, right?
GRANTSKI: That's correct.
GERAGOS: Okay. And he had a boat and you did not, correct?
GRANTSKI: Correct.
GERAGOS: Okay. And you went fishing, did you tell anybody in advance that you were going fishing?
GRANTSKI: I can't remember. I don't know if I did.
GERAGOS: Did you tell anybody at work that you were going fishing?
GRANTSKI: No.
GERAGOS: Okay. Did you tell anybody the night before, Hey, I'm going fishing tomorrow?
GRANTSKI: No.
GERAGOS: Did you call up anybody and say, well, did you call up Scott and say, Do you want to go fishing with me tomorrow?
GRANTSKI: No, I got tired of doing that.
I'm just making the point. Scott's fishing trip was made out to be so incredible and so unusual as to be incriminating, yet Ron Grantski did the same thing. Like so many other pieces presented in this case, Scott's fishing trip only looks suspicious if you presume him to be guilty.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CA4Now
A slightly different reaction to Laci's disappearance might be a clue.
I'm not sure what you mean. Scott reacted to Laci's disappearance by calling her family and friends and asking if they'd seen her.
GRANTSKI: Probably around 11:00, 11:30, 12:00. I wished everybody a Merry Christmas and said I would see them afterwards.
So that pretty much negates the comment made before that he went fishing before he was planning to join the rest of the family for dinner on Christmas Eve.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogg
I'm just making the point. Scott's fishing trip was made out to be so incredible and so unusual as to be incriminating, yet Ron Grantski did the same thing. Like so many other pieces presented in this case, Scott's fishing trip only looks suspicious if you presume him to be guilty.
I disagree. Grantski didn't have a wife who was 8 months pregnant and he wasn't apparently supposed to be at the dinner. It's a different scenario altogether.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogg
I'm not sure what you mean. Scott reacted to Laci's disappearance by calling her family and friends and asking if they'd seen her.
Watch the Dateline video clip that Lieneke linked a few posts back.
When Peterson returned from his fishing trip, he washed his clothes, ordered a pizza, and then called Laci's mother, stating that Laci was "missing." If you didn't know where your wife was, and thought she might be with friends or other family members, would you say that she was "missing"? As one of the investigators says in the clip, "Where do you draw that conclusion?"
Status:
"I don't understand. But I don't care, so it works out."
(set 3 days ago)
35,606 posts, read 17,935,039 times
Reputation: 50634
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogg
I'm just making the point. Scott's fishing trip was made out to be so incredible and so unusual as to be incriminating, yet Ron Grantski did the same thing. Like so many other pieces presented in this case, Scott's fishing trip only looks suspicious if you presume him to be guilty.
That's it. I remember someone associated with the case (maybe a juror, maybe an investigator, maybe a media talking head) saying when you keep bringing up evidence, this guy's got an answer for EVERYTHING! As if, that was a point in the prosecution's favor.
It isn't. It's a point in Peterson's favor, with every piece of apparently damning information, he's got an answer for it.
At one point an investigator commented something about he lies and lies and lies. The reporter asked if they'd caught him in lies or was he saying things that went contrary to their hypothesis of guilt. The investigator started to answer, and then stopped and appeared to really consider that a possibility - he wasn't telling lies, he was just giving answers that were contrary to the investigator's suppositions.
He lied and lied to Amber about where he was. We all heard that for days. He was a man trying to keep his lover from learning about his wife.
That's it. I remember someone associated with the case (maybe a juror, maybe an investigator, maybe a media talking head) saying when you keep bringing up evidence, this guy's got an answer for EVERYTHING! As if, that was a point in the prosecution's favor.
It isn't. It's a point in Peterson's favor, with every piece of apparently damning information, he's got an answer for it.
At one point an investigator commented something about he lies and lies and lies. The reporter asked if they'd caught him in lies or was he saying things that went contrary to their hypothesis of guilt. The investigator started to answer, and then stopped and appeared to really consider that a possibility - he wasn't telling lies, he was just giving answers that were contrary to the investigator's suppositions.
He lied and lied to Amber about where he was. We all heard that for days. He was a man trying to keep his lover from learning about his wife.
Scott was fishing for sturgeon using his wife as bait. He didn't lie, he omitted details.
As for that orange hair, I'm surprised that orange hair isn't common in all swimmers. A boy named "Jackie" was a cute comment when he bought the car. Claiming that his wife was dead on December 9 wasn't a lie, it was a premonition. Claims to some people that he was golfing on Dec 24 wasn't a lie, he simply forgot that he drove 200 miles round trip to put test his aluminium boat in the ocean.
Scott had an answer for everything, but was it believable?
So that pretty much negates the comment made before that he went fishing before he was planning to join the rest of the family for dinner on Christmas Eve.
How so? Grantski left work at 12:00-12:30, wishing his coworkers a Merry Christmas and went fishing for hours, alone, on the 24th even though he was planning to have dinner with the family. By "afterwards" he meant after the holiday.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CA4Now
I disagree. Grantski didn't have a wife who was 8 months pregnant and he wasn't apparently supposed to be at the dinner. It's a different scenario altogether.
So a man can't leave his pregnant wife at home alone for a few hours? That's incriminating? And again, Grantski was expected at dinner.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CA4Now
Watch the Dateline video clip that Lieneke linked a few posts back.
When Peterson returned from his fishing trip, he washed his clothes, ordered a pizza, and then called Laci's mother, stating that Laci was "missing." If you didn't know where your wife was, and thought she might be with friends or other family members, would you say that she was "missing"? As one of the investigators says in the clip, "Where do you draw that conclusion?"
Scott put his wet fishing clothes in the washer and took a shower. He didn't order a pizza, he ate a leftover slice from the refrigerator after having not eaten all day.
First, Sharon Rocha never mentioned in all of her police and media interviews for a month that Scott ever said "missing". She suddenly remembered that much later after the family had turned on Scott. Second, even if he had said that, Scott had several clues that something was seriously amiss. Among other things, Laci's car in the driveway, the dog being leashed, no signs that Laci had been baking as she planned, and most alarming was the voicemail from Grantski indicating Laci wasn't at their house as she was supposed to be.
First, Sharon Rocha never mentioned in all of her police and media interviews for a month that Scott ever said "missing". She suddenly remembered that much later after the family had turned on Scott. Second, even if he had said that, Scott had several clues that something was seriously amiss. Among other things, Laci's car in the driveway, the dog being leashed, no signs that Laci had been baking as she planned, and most alarming was the voicemail from Grantski indicating Laci wasn't at their house as she was supposed to be.
I had forgotten that there was a voicemail saying she wasn't where she was supposed to be, which makes it even more alarming that she wasn't at home when Scott got back. In the face of such alarming clues, why did he stop to change clothes, take a shower, and eat before he started searching for her?
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.
