The bodies were planted.... a MUST read!

[jack1024]

barbaraweaver said:

plove360 said:

What gets me is how they tried to make Scott looking up currents and tides , Sorry I live on the beach and I do that all the time before I plan to go to play in the ocean, I dont want to go with high tide or strong rip currents, So it is not uncommon for someone going fishing or even swimming in the ocean to look this type of info up before deciding what day to go. Plus I want to know things like water temp . Sorry but the ocean is a big place and I am not going into it with sharks and Jelly fish etc without all the information I can have Rip currents can kill you

Not to mention, the alleged "research" lasted about 30 seconds per page and was weeks before...... so what good was it 12/24?

When people are brainwashed, the actual facts don't matter.

It only takes 30 seconds, or less, to hit the "print" button.

[jack1024]

happyhaddock said:

The most compelling evidence, according to many, was that the bodies of Laci and Conner were found 'exactly' where Scott was boating on the day that Laci was abducted. Let us look at that.

According the state's witness Cheng, an oil slick which was created along Scott's route would never have been found where Laci's body was found. Even though Laci's body showed signs of water immersion (barnacles etc.) it therefore cannot be connected in place to Scott. Equally, although both bodies appeared in the bay environs and were easily found, this occurred after almost 4 months and after one of the most extensive searches of the bay ever performed. Therefore Laci's body and that of Conner cannot be connected in time to Scott. We are left with connecting Conner's body to Scott in space.

What about Conner then? Cheng claimed that his body location was consistent with Scott's boating route (if he was an oil slick). However,
No evidence was offered that Conner was ever in the water of the bay and
No evidence was ever offered that Conner could have come to be so far up on the shore (24 feet) from the water and
No evidence was ever offered that Conner could have made it through the breakwater unscathed and
No evidence was ever offered that Conner could have become as entangled in the twine as he was when he was found.

Thus Conner cannot be connected to Scott in time or in space. Others have shown that Cheng miscalculated or misrepresented the evidence he gave. Given that Conner cannot be connected to Scott even in the most extreme reading of the facts it is clear that others placed him, and by implication Laci, where AND when they were found.

Given that Cheng also misrepresented all of the tide and wind data he used in his 'charting', his evidence fails to be of any value whatsoever. All we have left is the 'closeness' of the bodies to where Scott once spent a few hours months before the bodies were found. Millions had such access. The argument is made that no one else would 'go to the trouble to dump the bodies there'. Then why would Scott? He had many easier options. He could have driven up into the hills and dumped the body with a good chance it could never be connected to him. If he had the 24 hours that is believed by many he could have driven east and hidden the body in many other places - perhaps even in another state. The prosecution 'theory' is ludicrous.

Mark Geragos did not call Dr. Henry Lee to the stand because as Dr. Lee states in his new book, after examinaning Laci and Conner's body, he believes Laci was in the bay for approximately 4 months. The baby, he stated, died in the womb close to Dec. 23rd and was released from the body shortly before it washed up on shore. He is adament about it.

[artguy]

Henry Lee is not someone you just "call" to the stand. Dr. Lee is the highest paid forensic scientist on the planet. After a consultation, which I am sure included estimates for the cost of Dr. Lee’s services to perform extensive testing and several days testimony, it was a strategic and financial move by the defense to opt for a more affordable – albeit less dependable expert witness. Given the fact that there was no evidence linking Scott to the crime, the defense probably felt that Dr. Lee was overkill. It wasn’t like O.J., where the prosecution actually had a case. They should not have needed to exhaust those kinds of resources, which they did not have, to prove a case for the prosecution, who just happened to have no evidence.

[texasgirl]

About the head and limbs missing. I believe one of the prosecution's experts stated that this happened due to the weights used to hold the body down...on each wrist and leg, and around the neck. So then, why weren't these weights with body parts ever found? I also recall that Dr. Wecht said that decomposition alone would not have accounted for the head and limbs to detach from the body, in four months...not even four years. It makes no sense to think that all four extremities plus the head would have come loose in that time. Maybe one foot, and/or one hand. Not all four plus the head itself. Just didn't happen. MOO.

[happyhaddock]

texasgirl said:

About the head and limbs missing. I believe one of the prosecution's experts stated that this happened due to the weights used to hold the body down...on each wrist and leg, and around the neck. So then, why weren't these weights with body parts ever found? I also recall that Dr. Wecht said that decomposition alone would not have accounted for the head and limbs to detach from the body, in four months...not even four years. It makes no sense to think that all four extremities plus the head would have come loose in that time. Maybe one foot, and/or one hand. Not all four plus the head itself. Just didn't happen. MOO.

Not only that,

Evelyn Hernandez of San Francisco vanished May 1. Body found July 24.

How many days did Evelyn Hernandez spend in the ocean? It is 84 days from May 1 (her vanishing) and July 24 (the finding of her body). Laci's body was clearly in better condition than EH's, leading to the conclusion that Laci could not have been in the sea as long as EH (assuming the prosecution's stupid theory). If Laci was in the water for only a portion of the time that EH was, say 75%, that means 63 days. That means Scott is innocent. Even 84 days means Scott is innocent. And there's no proof that EH was in the water for the full 84 days. From the condition of her body we cannot determine when the skeletonizing was complete.
We also cannot say when she was dumped in the bay, so it is incorrect to assume that she was there for the full 84 days. EH was more advanced in her pregnancy than Laci, so she should not have been more quickly skeletonized.

And no, the sea water varies very little in temperature so that is not a factor.

[texasgirl]

happyhaddock said:

texasgirl said:

About the head and limbs missing. I believe one of the prosecution's experts stated that this happened due to the weights used to hold the body down...on each wrist and leg, and around the neck. So then, why weren't these weights with body parts ever found? I also recall that Dr. Wecht said that decomposition alone would not have accounted for the head and limbs to detach from the body, in four months...not even four years. It makes no sense to think that all four extremities plus the head would have come loose in that time. Maybe one foot, and/or one hand. Not all four plus the head itself. Just didn't happen. MOO.

Not only that,

Evelyn Hernandez of San Francisco vanished May 1. Body found July 24.

How many days did Evelyn Hernandez spend in the ocean? It is 84 days from May 1 (her vanishing) and July 24 (the finding of her body). Laci's body was clearly in better condition than EH's, leading to the conclusion that Laci could not have been in the sea as long as EH (assuming the prosecution's stupid theory). If Laci was in the water for only a portion of the time that EH was, say 75%, that means 63 days. That means Scott is innocent. Even 84 days means Scott is innocent. And there's no proof that EH was in the water for the full 84 days. From the condition of her body we cannot determine when the skeletonizing was complete.
We also cannot say when she was dumped in the bay, so it is incorrect to assume that she was there for the full 84 days. EH was more advanced in her pregnancy than Laci, so she should not have been more quickly skeletonized.

And no, the sea water varies very little in temperature so that is not a factor.

I agree with you 100%!

[Maggie]

jack1024 said:

Mark Geragos did not call Dr. Henry Lee to the stand because as Dr. Lee states in his new book, after examinaning Laci and Conner's body, he believes Laci was in the bay for approximately 4 months. The baby, he stated, died in the womb close to Dec. 23rd and was released from the body shortly before it washed up on shore. He is adament about it.

If you want to quote Geragos or Dr. Lee, then you need to back up your claims and list your source for exact quotes.

Your general opinion of what they thought is not acceptable, and in my opinion you are wrong.

[artguy]

I want to add what a sad state of affairs the world is in if it takes a Henry Lee to exonerate someone in a case where the prosecution does not have a single shred of physical evidence linking the defendant to the crime. I fear that the jury was so brainwashed and manipulated by a media-infused public frenzy that even a dozen Dr. Lees, all testifying categorically that it was impossible for Scott to have committed the crime, still would not have been adequate to convince them of the truth. That jury (or at least most of them) had made up their minds that Scott was guilty long before the first witness ever took the stand. And that alone is the single greatest tragedy of this trial and something that should strike fear deep into the hearts of everyone living in our society. Make no mistake, what happened to Scott can now happen to anyone. An extremely dangerous precedent has been set, which now poses a distinct threat to every free American; and that threat will linger and grow until such time that an appeal is granted in this case.



“The only place you could send this case probably where they wouldn't hear about it [meaning, where Scott might receive a fair trial] I'm not so sure about that - would be send it to Mars.”
-- Judge Delucchi

[Maggie]

artguy said:

I want to add what a sad state of affairs the world is in if it takes a Henry Lee to exonerate someone in a case where the prosecution does not have a single shred of physical evidence linking the defendant to the crime.


“The only place you could send this case probably where they wouldn't hear about it [meaning, where Scott might receive a fair trial] I'm not so sure about that - would be send it to Mars.”
-- Judge Delucchi

snip for space only.

I agree 100% Art.

As for Delucchi-- he is a disgrace to all judges.

[happyhaddock]

jack1024 said:

Scott did not just research the tides in the San Francisco Bay, he also researched "how to pass a lie detector test".

Where is the proof of this? Post a link to it.

[heart]

I never heard that Scott researched how to pass a lie detector test.. He had went to take one with Amber and they backed out is what I remember..Where did you hear that he researched that?

[happyhaddock]

heart said:

I never heard that Scott researched how to pass a lie detector test.. He had went to take one with Amber and they backed out is what I remember..Where did you hear that he researched that?

There was never a suggestion that he did any such research.

As for the test with Frey, she didn't turn up but Brocchini did and walked over to Scott to let him know that he, Brocchini was there and that Frey wasn't. IMO Brocchini wanted to scuttle any independent test since he, Brocchini , couldn't lie about the results of that (a common cop trick).

[kim]

I have in fact read the Henry Lee book as well as transcripts from his CNN interviews, and he feels that that the jury did NOT have credible reason to convict Scott. I do not know why someone is trying to twist Dr Lee's perspective around. In his book, he specifically makes clear it was NOT the evidence that got Scott convicted, it was what Dr Lee refers to as Scott's courtroom demeanor and his behavior after Laci's disappearance. In other words - not evidence, just people's perception of whether Scott behaved in a manner they found personally acceptable.

[4justice2]

People who assert that Peterson researched "how to pass a lie detector test" are commonly referred to as DIDIOTS.
The state proved unequivically that neither Laci's nor their child's bodies were in that bay while they were searching it.
Ergo, the bodies were found where they had been dumped by, in all probablility, one or more of the sleazy cops who were accomplices of the actual murderer.