|
Post by shadez on Aug 8, 2005 6:30:57 GMT -5
I too believe he is guilty but as others said it was not proven. It was let known that he was at Berkley Marina that morning, thus if anyone wanted to "frame" him they knew where they could dump the body to make it look like he did it. The jury was tainted, I'll say that but Scott was to unwilling to cooperate and showed no show of emotion that I could see other then a few "crocodile tears" on a tv interview. And the phone calls with Amber? Especially the one during his wifes candlelight vigil, where he said he was in Paris? C'mon now... This is one comment that bothers me the most. Scott showed NO emotion. Scott was going through this for over a year by the time the trial started, his lawyers had shown him the autopsy photos, the recovery photos, gone through the testimony of witnesses so many times he was removed from it. Yes after a year of this you do get removed. Kind of like a bad movie. You could be asking why Geragos and Distaso weren't crying during these photos as well, the jury was, the judge even cried a bit, and yes Scott dropped his head, and cried, he had to use a tissue to wipe his eyes. (Check out the reports from Beth Karas who was in the court room that day) Even when he showed emotion, just like in your post, everyone says it was faked. He couldn't win either way. Amber, I won't even try to be an armchair shrink. I don't understand that one. I don't buy into anyone who hasn't met with and personally interviewed Scott either. Their evaluations are clearly unprofessional. Psych 101 you can't evaluate a client with out doing an in person evaluation and background fact gathering. I personally don't think Scott thought Amber knew, and believed Laci would be coming home. OR another possibility he thought she knew where Laci was and needed to figure out how to find out. Who knows? Ok, who 5 days after his wife and child goes missing calls their mistress from the vigil for his missing pregnant wife, then taking it a step further lying about himself being in Paris. SO you are saying he was desensitized in 5 days?? I think not..
|
|
|
Post by Maggie on Aug 8, 2005 7:50:42 GMT -5
Amber hounded Scott with calls that day and she knew about the vigil, as she was at that point co-operating with the police. When Scott finally called her back, it wasn't at the vigil. It was around 3:30ish... no vigil going on at that time. He was set up by Amber and the MPD for that whole vigil thing. Who cares where he said he was. He was trying to keep Amber who would NOT STOP CALLING at a distance!! No doubt Scott payed the ULTIMATE price for trying to get a little sex outside the marriage...... even worse than Bill Clinton. Most Americans forgave old Billy boy, but Scott became the most hated man in America. Men, don't cheat on your pregnant wife.... if it's the First Lady or Hillary, then it's okay
|
|
|
Post by shadez on Aug 8, 2005 7:58:31 GMT -5
Amber did not call Scott the day of the vigil and at that time, Dec 31st, the police did not even know about her nor did Amber even know about Scott having a missing wife. This is only 1 week after Laci went missing. Scott continued to "wooo" Amber well into January. Read the transcripts.
|
|
|
Post by Maggie on Aug 8, 2005 8:02:43 GMT -5
Amber did not call Scott the day of the vigil and at that time, Dec 31st, the police did not even know about her nor did Amber even know about Scott having a missing wife. This is only 1 week after Laci went missing. Scott continued to "wooo" Amber well into Janguary. Read the transcripts. I have read them. I have also seen the phone records as they were entered into evidence. Scott didn't call Amber from the vigil. Amber called him earlier in the day. She kept trying to talk to him. During the 3:30ish call when he called her and said something about the crowd noise, he wasn't at the vigil. (There was no vigil at that time). But, he called her immediately after she called him. She prompted those calls that day. She knew there was a vigil going on, because she admitted to that on one of her interviews. So, it was a setup through and through. Amber’s interview with Matt Lauer: Lauer: "You were listening to him say things like, I'm at the Eiffel Tower. The celebration's unreal. By this time you knew there was a vigil that night for Laci Peterson. Are you thinking, I'm dealing with a sociopath here." Frey: "I was very much afraid." Lauer: "For your own safety?" Frey: "I still at that point had not been home. I was afraid to go home." msnbc.msn.com/id/6786634/
|
|
|
Post by shadez on Aug 8, 2005 8:08:32 GMT -5
Amber also said in same interview, and in her book, that she believed he was in Paris at the time with two of his friends. I'm not going to start c&p excerpts from the transcripts. And I stand corrected, you are right about her cooperating with police then, I did hear the recording from that particular phone call on courttv. I believe she was cooperating but I also believe she did think he was in fact in Paris tho.
|
|
|
Post by truth1 on Aug 8, 2005 11:33:19 GMT -5
Amber hounded Scott with calls that day and she knew about the vigil, as she was at that point co-operating with the police. When Scott finally called her back, it wasn't at the vigil. It was around 3:30ish... no vigil going on at that time. He was set up by Amber and the MPD for that whole vigil thing. Who cares where he said he was. He was trying to keep Amber who would NOT STOP CALLING at a distance!! No doubt Scott payed the ULTIMATE price for trying to get a little sex outside the marriage...... even worse than Bill Clinton. Most Americans forgave old Billy boy, but Scott became the most hated man in America. Men, don't cheat on your pregnant wife.... if it's the First Lady or Hillary, then it's okay That is ridiculous! It is all Amber's fault, right? Phone records do not lie. He called her plenty of times. He said he lied to get Amber to stop calling? Man, you believe everything this guy says.
|
|
|
Post by sclcookie on Aug 8, 2005 13:08:38 GMT -5
Amber also said in same interview, and in her book, that she believed he was in Paris at the time with two of his friends. I'm not going to start c&p excerpts from the transcripts. And I stand corrected, you are right about her cooperating with police then, I did hear the recording from that particular phone call on courttv. I believe she was cooperating but I also believe she did think he was in fact in Paris tho. There is more to all this then y'all know. Never believe everything you hear on the news. You only get one side of the story. hugggz, Suzanne
|
|
|
Post by conner on Aug 8, 2005 13:59:09 GMT -5
My reasoning for believing in Scott's innocence is a little different that Maggie's. And Maggie and I have been on the same forum for months and we get along great. ;D My reasoning comes down to Conner. His autopsy report and Dr. Peterson and Dr. Wecht. Conner's body was found some 14 ft beyond the shoreline. He was "washed up" beyond a rock jetty with only ONE laceration to the chest. There was no evidence of any marine feeding. There was twine around his neck with only a 2 cm gap which could not just be slipped over his head. It was tied with a BOWTIE. There were also square pieces of black "debris" which has been describe as seaweed and tape, but it was discarded before Dr. Wecht was allow to see it. I have read everything I can on the subject of babies head's conforming in shape. (Or however you want to word it) To the point I can't read anymore about it. Most is very graphic because I was reading post mortem. For the condition of Conner's body, the tape/twine on this neck, and the Dr. reports (both doctors) I don't believe for a minute that Conner was not removed from Laci's body. The how or why I don't understand. But the evidence is there, and it came from Dr. Wecht, who is certainly one of the best forensic doctors of our time. Dr. Wecht never testified at trial. There is no evidence as to what his opinion may have been.
|
|
|
Post by shadez on Aug 8, 2005 14:20:17 GMT -5
Amber also said in same interview, and in her book, that she believed he was in Paris at the time with two of his friends. I'm not going to start c&p excerpts from the transcripts. And I stand corrected, you are right about her cooperating with police then, I did hear the recording from that particular phone call on courttv. I believe she was cooperating but I also believe she did think he was in fact in Paris tho. There is more to all this then y'all know. Never believe everything you hear on the news. You only get one side of the story. hugggz, Suzanne No, but records don't lie.. I heard the tapes as I'm sure you did. "Amber... I'm at the Eiffel tower its new years eve" And the time on the phone bills that are shown on courttv ARE during the same time as Lacis vigil Jan 31.
|
|
|
Post by janice on Aug 8, 2005 14:33:05 GMT -5
December 31, 2002: Calls between Amber and Scott:
11:35 am SP called AF 11:42 am AF called SP 2:59 pm AF called SP *3:05 pm SP called AF 4:18 pm SP called AF 4:20 pm SP called AF (he left msg)
*the transcript is 1 1/2 pages long...maybe duration of 2 mins??
The vigil began at 4:30.
I came up with the 2 min duration for the 3:05 pm because the 4:18 call is 3 pages and as we can see it took 2 minutes.
So actually Scott spent 5 minutes speaking to Amber before the vigil
|
|
|
Post by shadez on Aug 8, 2005 14:36:20 GMT -5
Regardless if it was 5 mins before, 5 mins after... this is 5 days after his pregnant wife went missing. He should have been more concerned about that then trying to call his mistress.
|
|
|
Post by Maggie on Aug 8, 2005 14:59:46 GMT -5
Dr. Wecht never testified at trial. There is no evidence as to what his opinion may have been. The "evidence" of his opinion is when he spoke it VAN SUSTEREN: All right. Can you estimate when Conner died? WECHT: No, I can't, for the same reason. There was meconium, so the baby probably died within 48 hours, did not have to die right away. Let me say that there is no way to defensively state that that baby could not have been removed from the uterus. And the idea that, as one of your panelists who's not with you this evening has wildly explained as bizarre and so on — Jeffrey Dahmer was bizarre and Robert Berdella was bizarre. And there's a lot of things that are bizarre, and especially in the state of California. So to remove a baby and to keep it alive for a short while, the baby dies, for whatever reason. And you know that twine around the neck and over the shoulder, on the arm? How about if there is some kind of a bag that is over the baby that is held in place with that tape, and the bag dissolves and breaks apart in the water and the tape remains? There are a lot of explanations. The baby's head was 28 centimeters circumference. I measured 20 centimeters around the neck. You talk about something coming over the head, the body's floating in the water? You couldn't do that in a million years.There's lot of things that are inexplicable in this case, and the idea that, Oh, it's absolutely definite — you can talk all you want about Amber Frey and you can talk all you want about what a cad he is and his dyed hair and his money in the wallet, the fundamental things apply, as they say in that song, Greta. And where was the death? When was the death? What was the mechanism of the death? Where's all the biological forensic evidence in this case? Where is it? Where is it? VAN SUSTEREN: Let me ask you a scientific question. Maybe you can answer this, maybe you can't. But there has been some suggestion that the baby was in the water for a short period of time. Could you validate that assertion or not? WECHT: Yes, I would agree. The dead baby was not in the water for three-and-a-half months. No way. The baby was in the water two days, three days, four days, something like this. There's no question about that.
|
|
|
Post by Maggie on Aug 8, 2005 15:04:14 GMT -5
Regardless if it was 5 mins before, 5 mins after... this is 5 days after his pregnant wife went missing. He should have been more concerned about that then trying to call his mistress. Does four "dates" mean mistress shadez? If you had a meaningless fling and then your wife went missing, would you want that fling showing up, possibly very upset you lied about your marital status..... when you are trying to find your missing wife? Also- Scott was on trial for murder, not adultry.
|
|
Ohpal
Settlin' In
Posts: 11
|
Post by Ohpal on Aug 8, 2005 15:07:33 GMT -5
No doubt Scott payed the ULTIMATE price for trying to get a little sex outside the marriage...... even worse than Bill Clinton. Most Americans forgave old Billy boy, but Scott became the most hated man in America. Men, don't cheat on your pregnant wife.... if it's the First Lady or Hillary, then it's okay Comparing these 2 men is like comparing apples and oranges.... the difference between Bill and Scott is that Bill didn't murder Hillary.
|
|
|
Post by shadez on Aug 8, 2005 15:11:44 GMT -5
Very good good point Ophal. It's the difference between night and day, you can't compare the two. And to compare a "Cheater" to a "Murderer" is beyond reasoning. Also I don't think Hillary was pregnant at the time either.
|
|