Scott Peterson-- Innocent on Death Row

[Maggie]

Scott Peterson is the reason my views on the DP changed. I can no longer support the death penalty, because in following the Peterson trial my eyes were opened to the massive amount of corruption that is taking over the justice system in the US.

I believe 100% that Scott Peterson is innocent of murder. It haunts me that he is on death row. I pray for his appeal to move swiftly.

I will never again trust the media.

Anyone who followed the case against Scott Peterson in the media, and "assume" he is guilty.... I'm here to tell you he is NOT! The case against him is a travesty of justice....

[jojo29]

Barbara,

I have to agree with you about the media. They spin things to an extent where you can't get a fair trial. In Bobby's case they made him look 'cocky'. Why? Because a cocky man will be hated and sell more newspapers, a suffering innocent person will not sell papers without some sort of twist! It is sad that this can happen in a country like ours.

[oztash]

I agree... I believe that the media circus has a lot to do with the out come of many trials....This needs to stop in order to insure a fare trial for all...
Tasha

[Maggie]

Lee Peterson speaks out on behalf of his son: written to the Modesto Bee.

A Letter From Scott Peterson's Father

Last Updated: May 3, 2005, 05:15:22 AM PDT


Investigation a $4.13M lie
Concerning the article "Peterson's final tab $4.13M" (April 22, Page A-1), it is time for some truth to be told. Modesto citizens bore the cost of the police department investigation and trial to put an innocent man on death row.

Ron Grantski says the investigation was done professionally; ergo, a conviction was forthcoming. That is utter nonsense. The detectives in this case were anything but professional. They leaked lies to the media from day one.

For example, a life insurance policy which was two years old was reported to the media to be just days old.

The Modesto Police Department failed to follow up on solid leads and sightings. These leads did not fit the MPD's scenario. The police deliberately withheld exculpatory evidence — a woman saw Laci at the warehouse where the boat was kept. That would account for the single hair found in the boat, a hair that might have been Laci's.

Expenditures of $4 million and the MPD, FBI and Department of Justice came up with one hair, which possibly belonged to Laci and which could have been where it was found by any number of means.

My son has no history of violence or a police record that suggests he could be capable of anything like this. My son was convicted by the media, mostly because of lies leaked by the MPD. Pressure was brought to solve this crime (and) pin it on someone so the MPD wouldn't look inept. The MPD gave in to this pressure.

My son was convicted because he had an affair. He was convicted by a jury full of hatred because of the way Scott was vilified in the media.

He was convicted because of public opinion. Scott was not convicted of this crime under the standards required by law. The evidence presented did not meet the standards required to convict.

Consider: There was no cause of death, no crime scene, no motive, not a shred of evidence in the home or truck, no background of abuse, not even a harsh word was heard from Scott to Laci by any witness — including Sharon Rocha or Laci's siblings or friends.

The media manipulates our justice system in this country, and all you folks out there (especially in Modesto) should be scared as hell of what could happen to you and your families in this atmosphere of police corruption and media bias.

The Modesto Police Department, by its behavior, made it clear it cared not one whit about truth or justice. The detectives and the chief were only interested in self-aggrandizement and their own careers.

The power these people have (and utterly misused) is awesome. Because of them, a man is on death row and a family is hurting beyond all comprehension.

Scott will be freed through the appellate process in time, mark my words. He is innocent, innocent, innocent.

LEE PETERSON

Solana Beach
www.modbee.com/opinion/letters/story/10420880p-11221308c.html

[CCADP]

I haven't seen any more of the case than what the media tried to shove down our throughts - but I do know that Maggie has been privy to a lot of materials that none of us saw. Don't forget the trial wasn't televised; all we saw was months and months and months of talking heads. Nancy Grace of Court TV said he was guilty right away; and she's also thought 'runaway brides' fiance was obviously a killer; etc etc. I've seen tons of cases where the guy looked guilty as sin; and later it turned out the DNA says different; I've seen cases where evidence was planted; where forensic technicians lied...etc
All I know about the case is that ANY legal expert - even the ones who think scott must be guilty as sin - knows its a PURELY circumstantial case; with not one bit of physical evidence pointing to Peterson. Laci being found in the bay may LOOK like a damning piece of evidence- but its evidence of CIRCUMSTANCE alone, not proof. And none of us have heard whats been said on the defense side about that. Also; that alone; the case needs to be looked at as a DP case.
The jury machinations and manipulations alone at the end are very very irregular and deserving of an appeal being won alone; as was the manner of the jury in interviews afterwards and the hatred they showed of Peterson; it was just over the top.
Great distraction from the war though; huh!?? (for the media it made lots of ratings.)

[Maggie]

truth1 said:

I think the media did turn the trial into a circus. But, I also believe he was quilty. Too may red flags to be considered coincidence. Of course his father is going to say his son is innocent. What his father failed to explain away was the fact that Laci's body was found in the area he said he was fishing! Scott dumped the body there because he though it would not be found. He could not risk dropping the body in a different lake because people might remember seeing him there when he was supposed to be at a another lake.

Allow me to address this.

The bodies did not "wash up" where Scott was. Scott boated to Brooks Island, the bodies were not found there. The State's expert testified to the trajectory of Conner's body only, he could not do the same with Laci. If Conner's body separated from Laci, it stands to reason they should have gone in the same direction. The bigger question is why would Scott tell the MPD the exact spot he was at in the Bay if that is where he dumped the body?
Also- do you know how shallow the Bay is? Do you know how many sonar searches were done prior to the discovery of the bodies? My guess is you do not.
Scott drove to the Bay and legally purchased a launch ticket in broad daylight in a populated area. These facts are not in dispute. Am I to believe that Scott chose the very public Bay, in broad daylight, to take his wife’s dead body out on the maiden voyage of his untested boat, risking almost certain capsize, to dump it in shallow water? No- I can’t buy that.

This board is not the place to debate Scott Peterson's guilt or innocence-- although I will be happy to do that with you off this board.

IMO- you obviously followed this case through the media. You always trust the media?
You shouldn't.

[CCADP]

thanks for this!

See; guys, Maggie knows this case and has looked into it way deeper than any of us have; sitting comfortable taking Nancy Grace and Greta Van Susteren's word for everything - don't forget that what the media reports usually comes straight from the DAs office and they report it without question.

thats the problem though; I think until its proven to us with something we know for sure they are outright lying about; most of us tend to believe that the media is reporting things as they are. People rarely think that the media has an outright agenda. Do you guys think this was the most important news story in the last 2 years? You'd think so; by hours devoted to it by the media!

Most of us have seen how it goes....again; I want to reiterate that I haven't studied the case at all - I plan to a little as CCADP will be making a support page shortly on Scott Peterson's behalf....regardless though; he should not be on Death row; and regarding the guilt or innocence issue - just remember; it is very, very true that

You CAN'T believe everything you read and hear...

and if you want to have a valid opinion on it one way or the other; study the case; the legal documents; etc.

Maggie has!

[CCADP]

it wasn't a slight...

I think a lot of us don't have time to review everything; and until u know different its natural to believe what they're saying about something like a criminal case.

I actually think its ok to have this discussion on the board; others probably have an interest in it as well... I guess Maggie just meant for time and space

Again, I don't have a particular opinion yet on guilt or innocence as I would have nothing to base it on but what I've heard - and I've learned not to trust what I hear from those sources...

I feel its no different from any other case - the only difference is the media attention paid - and it should be evaluation fairly without the spotlight....

[CCADP]

If u mean me; I'm not that informed on this case at all - because I tried to avoid the circus!

I do believe that Maggie is informed though; she has spent a lot more time on it than we have and knows some of the people involved as a result.

The jury ? Well; i think a lot of the conviction had to do with Amber Frey's tapes; which did not prove murder; but that he was having an affair. I'm sure you've heard that but its a fact. There was also; as in any court case; things the jury was not allowed to hear and evidence the defense was not allowed to present.

There are lots of juries that wrongly convict people who are later proven innocent and released.

Just because the jury says something does not make it so. And I think Peterson never would have been sentenced to death; even if he was convicted, without the glare of the media.

Remember the early days of the trial ?Trial watchers thought the pros. did not have a very good case and expect a not guilty until Amber Frey....then the case started going their way.

again tho; I am sure not presenting myself as an expert on this one.

tracy

[Maggie]

truth1 said:

What??? How can you say that this board is not the place to discuss his guilt or innocence when YOU started the thread entitled: "Scott Peterson - Innocent on Death Row"? By the way, I never said her body "washed up". And furthermore, I have more important things to do than "follow the case through the media". I did review legal documents. Maggie can read all the "legal" documents she wants, however, it is just words written by a person with an opinion. I know that will irritate you. But, you seem to reject everything poing to Peterson's guilt and you call it "circumstantial". Present some hard anecdotal evidence to the contrary. I do consider myself to be intelligent and DO NOT believe everything I hear.

Excuse me, but do I know you from a different board that discussed the Peterson case? How do you know what I reject or accept?
By the way the documents I focused on were transcripts from the trial, sworn testimony, NOT "opinions".
I didn't want to take away from the main purpose of this board and start debating this case..... but like I said before I'll be happy to debate the issues with you- in fact, we can do it right here. You need to lose the defensive attitude however- because I will not engage in an attack fest.

So--- what is your fisrt point? Please be specific.

Thanks in advance for a civil debate.

[jojo29]

I really don't have much of an opinion about the Peterson case, because I am not all that informed on it except for what was in the media. With that being said I know I have said it before but listening to the media is never a good thing. My nana told me once, you believe half of what you hear and a quarter of what you read.

[Maggie]

JoJo29 said:

I really don't have much of an opinion about the Peterson case, because I am not all that informed on it except for what was in the media. With that being said I know I have said it before but listening to the media is never a good thing. My nana told me once, you believe half of what you hear and a quarter of what you read.

Hi JoJo,

My mom used to say something similar-- and it's true. What concerns me is the media is very powerful and the government doesn't seem to care how dangerous it is getting. Maybe because they are on the same corrupt team

Anyhow-- at least as far as Scott Peterson is concerned I can probably answer any questions you might have. If you have any

[Maggie]

truth1 said:

No, Tracy, I did not mean you.
Maggie,

The transcripts are public domain. Anyone can read them. And no, I do not know you from another board. I do not know for sure what you accept or reject; however, after reading your threads, I have a pretty good idea. As far as further discussion--we can discuss if you would like--otherwise I really have nothing more to say. He is locked up. No matter how much time we spend debating the legalities of the case, it will not change that. In all honesty (and you might agree with this), I do not see him walking out of there.

Any trial record (unless sealed by a judge for some reason) is public record..... but it's not easy to get access and VERY costly. I don't agree with this, but that's the way it is. If more people read the transcripts in the Peterson case, public opinion would be much different, imo. I wish everybody had free and easy access. They don't.
The "legalities" of the case are the very reason I fully expect Scott to have a successful appeal, but we don't need to debate it, we can agree to disagree.
Al "Petri Dish" Delucchi said many, many things on the record....
never mind......

Have a great day.

[CCADP]

Well; some of the legal information will be available soon here at the CCADP. We're in the process of working with Scott Peterson; and Maggie from this board (who has been corresponding with Scott and his family for some time) on making a CCADP support page for Scott.

The page will include a message from Scott; some of the appellate issues; links to legal and another support page; and further information to come at a later date.

For now; though; he'd like to thank those that have written him; and to explain that he is currently

"unable to correspond (attorney's demand)"

So for those who may view this board who have written messages of support to Scott Peterson, your good wishes are appreciated; even though for the most part he is not able to respond at this time.

When Scott - and Maggie - have finished sending all the materials to CCADP; we'll prepare the page; post it; and make sure we put the URL here; so people can at least read some of the materials for themselves (I haven't seen any of it yet either...) but I look forward to evaluating the case on my own; and not having Nancy Grace do it for me! (media)....

[oztash]

Tracey and Maggie

Awesome, I cant wait to do some reading on Scott... I thought he was guilty, but I read his appeal, from court tv. I was surprised about all the evidence that wasnt allowed in court, the one that sticks out in my head the most is he boat, the fact that his defense team made a clip demonstarting that it was impossible for Scott, to dumb laci body in the river, without over turning the boat... Another was the jury that was outed.... This gets me thinking about his case..

Maggie I hope I got my info right, I apologise if I have it wrong..

Best of luck to you Maggie
Tasha