|
Post by Maggie on Sept 14, 2005 14:33:18 GMT -5
Nancy is the picture I have of all prosecutors now. (Isn't that awful) Someone willing to sell their soul just to get a conviction on YOU! Sometimes they're right they've got the guilty party, no question about that. But when they're not, they still fight with everything they have to make a bad conviction stick to the wrong person. It disgusts me! Admittedly my generlized view of prosecutors isn't fair. But the generalized view of people on death row isn't fair either. Nancy Grace is a man-hater. Her boyfriend was killed many many years ago and now she hates all men and instantly assumes they are guilty. I found myself muting her during the Peterson trial. Me too...... same for Kimberly ex-Newsome...... Actually I muted just about all of CTV
|
|
|
Post by happyhaddock on May 25, 2006 17:17:50 GMT -5
Nancy is the picture I have of all prosecutors now. (Isn't that awful) Someone willing to sell their soul just to get a conviction on YOU! Sometimes they're right they've got the guilty party, no question about that. But when they're not, they still fight with everything they have to make a bad conviction stick to the wrong person. It disgusts me! Admittedly my generalized view of prosecutors isn't fair. But the generalized view of people on death row isn't fair either. Nancy Grace doesn't know the law, doesn't understand evidence, is confused by moral questions, and couldn't comprehend statistics if her life depended on it. Unfortunately she is not untypical of US prosecutors.
|
|
|
Post by happyhaddock on May 25, 2006 17:19:38 GMT -5
Me too...... same for Kimberly ex-Newsome...... Actually I muted just about all of CTV Crier is the same. Her book was extraordinary in its bias and incredible distortions. It is shocking that someone like that was ever a judge. Allred is a nightmare.
|
|
|
Post by Maggie on May 26, 2006 6:41:10 GMT -5
Me too...... same for Kimberly ex-Newsome...... Actually I muted just about all of CTV Crier is the same. Her book was extraordinary in its bias and incredible distortions. It is shocking that someone like that was ever a judge. Allred is a nightmare. Allred is a nightmare. I almost fainted on day when I heard her say on TV that Conner could have grown inside Laci after she was killed. Yes, I am dead serious. She said it. I heard it. I guess the law school she went to didn't require any biology, even basic grade school level. Of course she was on CTV, so the pundits (one being her daugher Bloom) let it slide.
|
|
|
Post by plove360 on May 26, 2006 9:52:01 GMT -5
She gives women a bad name and all that we have faught so hard for and she tries to mask it with shes standing up for women shameful
|
|
|
Post by artguy on Jun 21, 2006 13:34:50 GMT -5
She doesn't give the legal profession a particularly great name either. Somewhere along the line, Nancy forgot the part about "innocent until proven guilty".
|
|
|
Post by jack1024 on Jun 22, 2006 18:02:32 GMT -5
Scott is definately innocent of this crime. He was the only suspect that the MPD focused on from day one without any evidence besides a theory they put this man on death row and then patted themselves on the back ! The igored obvious evidence such as the tips from Tracy and the burglars. There is even a phone call that proves that Scott is innocent. Scott may not have been a perfect husband , have not met one yet , LOL ! But seriously Scott is innocent in everyway ! I noticed some of you said you were not sure so I will invite you to visit our site www.savescottslife.com so you can read up and form an opinion. This is false. The burglers were not only arrested, but they were given lie detector tests and passed. Their fingerprints, hair and clothing fibers were all over the house they robbed, none found at the Petersons residence.
|
|
|
Post by artguy on Jun 24, 2006 18:05:26 GMT -5
This is false. The burglers were not only arrested, but they were given lie detector tests and passed. Their fingerprints, hair and clothing fibers were all over the house they robbed, none found at the Petersons residence. 1. IF the 'burglars' were polygraphed it would not have been admissible anyway. Career criminals can fool a lie detector test so that would have been an exercise in futility. 2. The investigators were not looking for any other evidence in the Peterson home that did not implicate Scott. Even if they were, why would there be any evidence of any foul play by any third party? Laci was planning on going out, which is where she was abducted – in or near the park or when she confronted the ‘burglars’ at the Medina home. NOTE: A robbery is when an actual person is confronted; A burglary is when there is no one around. I’m not sure if you just don’t understand the difference or are entertaining the fact that Laci did in fact confront them, thus turning a would-be burglary into a robbery, assault, and subsequent abduction.
|
|
|
Post by texasgirl on Jun 26, 2006 15:06:47 GMT -5
Crier is the same. Her book was extraordinary in its bias and incredible distortions. It is shocking that someone like that was ever a judge. Allred is a nightmare. Allred is a nightmare. I almost fainted on day when I heard her say on TV that Conner could have grown inside Laci after she was killed. Yes, I am dead serious. She said it. I heard it. I guess the law school she went to didn't require any biology, even basic grade school level. Of course she was on CTV, so the pundits (one being her daugher Bloom) let it slide. Hi, Maggie! I heard that too, and couldn't believe a grown woman could be that ignorant. She was trying to explain the difference in Conner's size and Laci's uterus, I think, and said that 'of course, Conner continued to grow after Laci died. NOT possible. The fetus will die within minutes of the mother's death. It's a known medical fact. I'm not a doctor, a nurse, and I don't play one on t.v., but I know that much!! I wonder if Allred and Nancy Grace went to the same law school?
|
|
|
Post by happyhaddock on Jun 26, 2006 18:31:10 GMT -5
This is false. The burglers were not only arrested, but they were given lie detector tests and passed. Their fingerprints, hair and clothing fibers were all over the house they robbed, none found at the Petersons residence. 1. IF the 'burglars' were polygraphed it would not have been admissible anyway. Career criminals can fool a lie detector test so that would have been an exercise in futility. ... Actually, Jack is right. Each of them was hooked up to a lie detector. The only relevant question they were asked was, "Is your name Scott Lee Peterson"? Each denied it, and the operator reported they were telling the truth. OK, so I am cynical, but no one has seen a video of any tests. It is way too easy for the cops to get the results they want, and they are also prepared to lie about the results anyway, so I may be closer to the truth than you think. BTW, no one is suggesting that they went to the Petersons. They robbed the Medinas, and that is where they attacked Laci and abducted her. Why did the MPD dynamite the stolen safe after Geragos asked for it for testing?
|
|
|
Post by pinbalwyz on Sept 9, 2007 7:15:28 GMT -5
I think I may have seen a small part of that before, the part about him talking about abuse is not "approachable". The problem I have with that interview is when he talks about Laci not being very upset when she was told about his affair. Personally, if I was 8 months pregnant and and my husband having an affair I would be very upset and my husband would very well know how upset I was. Pregnant women are very emotional, especially, about their bodies, thinking that they are not attractive being pregnant. I agree. He must not be very intelligent if he honestly thinks people believe that. There are so many things that point to his guilt it is incredible. For instance, when he was in church holding his nephew and he began to cry. Touching, right? Well, what does he do afterwards? He goes home and phones the cable company and requests that two porn channels be added to his service. Then he calls his girlfriend. Sounds lika a grieving husband, huh? His case was very high profile. Didn't he think that the person at the cable company would find his carnal request a little odd? That is another example of how smug he really is. He thinks he is playing everyone like a fool. But, if he was really as slick as he thinks he is, we would not be having this debate. If Mr. Peterson had said, "I'm glad my wife is dead," would that have made him guilty? It would be a travesty (and perhaps IS) to have a person's post-mortem demeanor be the hinge upon which their guilt/innocence in a murder trial depended.
|
|
|
Post by pinbalwyz on Sept 9, 2007 7:49:45 GMT -5
Also- Scott was on trial for murder, not adultry. Yes, he was on trial for murder, but proving adultery was establishing bad character and motive for the very heinous he was then convicted of. Ah yes, when you have little in the way of facts/evidence, attack the PERSON and their CHARACTER. Ad hominem them all the way to the death chamber--yeah, that's the ticket!
|
|
|
Post by pinbalwyz on Sept 9, 2007 8:25:04 GMT -5
What do you mean nothing points to him? A) His wifes body found same place he went fishing (90 miles from his house) B) Witnesses saw him carrying out large "umbrellas" that morning. C) HE STILL CONTINUED to swoon Amber AFTER his wife was missing. D) He told Amber when he met her and before his wife went missing that this would be the first holiday without his wife. Need I go on? Yes, I think you do. A number of murder victims have turned up within 90 miles of where *I* live. I also carry objects (some large) to and from my vehicle/home. Adultery isn't homicide. An affair may well mean the marriage is amiss--but how credible is Amber? Moreover, stating you don't intend to be spending the holiday with the Mrs. isn't an admission to a crime.
|
|
|
Post by happyhaddock on Sept 9, 2007 12:58:18 GMT -5
Summary of the case: -
A pregnant woman vanishes from her home without a trace of a crime. Later, her badly decomposed body is found on the shore of the bay. Her uterus has been cut open and there is no trace of the fetus or the placenta. The baby is found, full term and not in the fetal position, on a different part of the shore. There is no sign he was ever in the sea. What part of this DOESN'T scream 'failed fetus napping'?
Despite a desperate search by the police not a trace of any evidence linking her husband to the crime can be found, and the prosecution is forced to resort to extreme efforts to spin what little they can find into a case against the husband. They play recorded telephone conversations between the husband and a woman he had sex with 3 or 4 times in an effort to blacken his reputation although nowhere in these calls does he ever make the slightest admission of guilt or anything approaching it.
Despite the total lack of credible evidence of guilt he is convicted, mainly on the strength of these conversations.
|
|
|
Post by randex on Sept 10, 2007 8:37:03 GMT -5
I don't "know" one way or the other.
|
|