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 9 days ago)
35,635 posts, read 17,982,736 times
Reputation: 50666
Advertisements
What I want to know, is why was the Croton watch that was pawned days after Laci went missing, in Modesto, by the DIL of the man in the tan van not pivotal evidence here? Why has that been ignored? THAT is the smoking gun, IMHO. What an unbelievable coincidence, that this homeless woman obtained a rare watch that matches the description of Laci's, that is now missing from her jewelry collection. THAT, IMHO, is far more compelling than Scott was a womanizer and a liar and now look here his wife is dead, and her remains ended up in the same very large bay where he had been fishing the day of her disappearance.
I can get through the evidence against Scott much more easily than I can explain the Croton watch pawned by this woman who was already suspect in her disappearance.
Maybe If Scott would have taken the stand to defend himself or showed any emotion at all during the trial instead of just sitting there like a bored psychopath I'd be more inclined to think he's innocent. The circumstantial evidence was too overwhelming... I think the jury got it right
Status:
"I don't understand. But I don't care, so it works out."
(set 9 days ago)
35,635 posts, read 17,982,736 times
Reputation: 50666
Quote:
Originally Posted by Finper
Maybe If Scott would have taken the stand to defend himself or showed any emotion at all during the trial instead of just sitting there like a bored psychopath I'd be more inclined to think he's innocent. The circumstantial evidence was too overwhelming... I think the jury got it right
See, that's what I'm saying too. I don't like him either. He's clearly shallow and his calls to Amber were . . . creepy. No wonder Geragos didn't put him on the stand.
A show of emotion isn't evidence of innocence, IMHO. It's sometimes evidence of guilt. There are certainly perps who go through the whole teary thing and fainting in their yard when they hear their spouse is missing - who are guilty.
Despite how unlikeable he is, and how smarmy and creepy, there isn't any evidence at all that he killed her.
I've always been a little surprised that Laci Rocha, who seems to be a deep and interesting woman, and lovely, married him. What made her fall in love with him, and until the day she died she was so devoted to him.
I'm not going to go argue with you, since that appears to be your specialty. (It's interesting, though, that you have John Ramsey as the murder suspect in that case, when there is no evidence against him, but you believe that somehow, Scott Peterson is unfairly targeted as a murder suspect in this case.)
Let's not get distracted, we're talking about the Peterson case. But I will mention the key difference here: Scott is a convicted murderer, not a mere suspect. John Ramsey has never been charged with anything.
You're claiming Scott wanted a divorce based strictly on what his half-sister claimed, while ignoring what everyone else close to Scott testified to. And this half-sister, it should be noted, had only met Scott a year prior, had very limited interaction with him and Laci, and was promoting her book. And you're calling this evidence? It's absurd.
After 85 pages of this thread I'm still waiting for someone, anyone, to cite one reliable piece of evidence that Scott murdered Laci. No one has, and no one can, because it doesn't exist.
Maybe If Scott would have taken the stand to defend himself or showed any emotion at all during the trial instead of just sitting there like a bored psychopath I'd be more inclined to think he's innocent. The circumstantial evidence was too overwhelming... I think the jury got it right
How do you know how Scott appeared during the trial? Did you attend?
See, that's what I'm saying too. I don't like him either. He's clearly shallow and his calls to Amber were . . . creepy. No wonder Geragos didn't put him on the stand.
A show of emotion isn't evidence of innocence, IMHO. It's sometimes evidence of guilt. There are certainly perps who go through the whole teary thing and fainting in their yard when they hear their spouse is missing - who are guilty.
Despite how unlikeable he is, and how smarmy and creepy, there isn't any evidence at all that he killed her.
I've always been a little surprised that Laci Rocha, who seems to be a deep and interesting woman, and lovely, married him. What made her fall in love with him, and until the day she died she was so devoted to him.
It's a puzzle.
psychopaths can be very charming and he's good looking. Laci wanted a baby and a husband so maybe she saw what she wanted to see. I've been friends with borderlines and pathological liars so I know how they can mess with your mind.
He said he was out fishing for Sturgeon in a row boat which is impossible the fish is way too big and her and Connors bodies where found in that same water. They found forms where he made large cement weights in his store room. In the interview he gave he cried but no tears and a call came in on his cell phone and he ignored the phone when his wife is missing. He went home bought porn on his cable and called his new hot girl friend. He sold her car weeks after she went missing. The circumstantial evidence is strong with this one.
Do you think he's innocent or just wasn't proven guilty??
Status:
"I don't understand. But I don't care, so it works out."
(set 9 days ago)
35,635 posts, read 17,982,736 times
Reputation: 50666
Quote:
Originally Posted by Finper
psychopaths can be very charming and he's good looking. Laci wanted a baby and a husband so maybe she saw what she wanted to see. I've been friends with borderlines and pathological liars so I know how they can mess with your mind.
He said he was out fishing for Sturgeon in a row boat which is impossible the fish is way too big and her and Connors bodies where found in that same water. They found forms where he made large cement weights in his store room. In the interview he gave he cried but no tears and a call came in on his cell phone and he ignored the phone when his wife is missing. He went home bought porn on his cable and called his new hot girl friend. He sold her car weeks after she went missing. The circumstantial evidence is strong with this one.
Do you think he's innocent or just wasn't proven guilty??
The circumstantial evidence is strong, I agree. I think in the video upthread, the cement weight thing is kind of disproven - it appears to be a guess on the part of investigators. I've certainly seen cases where you think WOW, that piece of evidence is damning! and then it turns out the people are innocent.
There was a little girl who was abducted from her bed at home overnight (I know, hardly ever happens). Upon finding her gone in the morning and looking around the house, the parents called the cops and they came to find the bed stripped of bed sheets. Where are her bedsheets, the parents were asked. Oh, they're in the wash. When we got home late last night her sheets were wet in the wash from the afternoon before and I had forgotten to transfer them to the drier. She only likes her little mermaid sheets and so she said she wanted to sleep on the bare mattress. The cops went into the laundry room, and there were her bedsheets, warm in the drier. Oh God that looks bad. It was all true though. Someone had broken in, taken her and killed her. Awful story, but the parents looked so very guilty.
I think it's quite possible Peterson is not guilty. And I'm 100% convinced the trial didn't PROVE him guilty.
How is this an idiotic question? You described Scott as "sitting there like a bored psychopath". I'm genuinely curious how you obtained this information. Did you observe that yourself?
The circumstantial evidence is strong, I agree. I think in the video upthread, the cement weight thing is kind of disproven - it appears to be a guess on the part of investigators. I've certainly seen cases where you think WOW, that piece of evidence is damning! and then it turns out the people are innocent.
Which video? This is a loooonngg thread to go clicking on every link.
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.
