|
appeals
Sept 3, 2007 21:46:29 GMT -5
Post by pumpkinpie on Sept 3, 2007 21:46:29 GMT -5
You bring up some really good points about Scott! Your right, sociopaths show signs of being a sociopath (pschopath) through out there life. Most of them do not follow the rules of society, don't obey laws, and usually spend most of there lives in and out of jail. Scott does not fit into that category at all. He seemed just the opposite in fact, and had no criminal record through-out his life, followed the rules of society, etc. Other than committing adultry, which is not illegal! So, that pretty much throws the sociopath theory out the window, I'd say! "Oooooh, you'd say that..."? Sssssss...mmmmmm I would not say that! What is it that you disagree with in my post regarding sociopaths? Other than your moanings and groanings, do you have some feedback on sociopathic behavior?
|
|
|
appeals
Sept 10, 2007 8:46:37 GMT -5
Post by randex on Sept 10, 2007 8:46:37 GMT -5
I have a question....why wouldn't he take the stand??? The most he could do was admit he lied..and had an affair...the jury needed to see him and hear him..they hadn't! The attorney who spent the weekend near the end of the trial interviewing Scott could probably answer this question.
|
|
|
appeals
Sept 10, 2007 11:38:06 GMT -5
Post by happyhaddock on Sept 10, 2007 11:38:06 GMT -5
I have a question....why wouldn't he take the stand??? The most he could do was admit he lied..and had an affair...the jury needed to see him and hear him..they hadn't! The attorney who spent the weekend near the end of the trial interviewing Scott could probably answer this question. Because the whole cross exam would have been about Frey, not the case. No matter what Scott said, Distaso would have spent hours on the minutest details of his 4 sexual encounters with Frey, rubbing his adultery in his face. After all, Scott knows less than nothing about what happened to Laci. As for "the jury needed to see him and hear him", this is just another of the many excuses this jury hid behind. It is crystal clear that not one of them can make a case for guilt based on the actual evidence, so they parrot out all of these excuses to cover up their abject failure to judge the facts honestly.
|
|
|
appeals
Sept 10, 2007 18:46:31 GMT -5
Post by randex on Sept 10, 2007 18:46:31 GMT -5
I have a question....why wouldn't he take the stand??? The most he could do was admit he lied..and had an affair...the jury needed to see him and hear him..they hadn't! The attorney who spent the weekend near the end of the trial interviewing Scott could probably answer this question. Because the whole cross exam would have been about Frey, not the case. No matter what Scott said, Distaso would have spent hours on the minutest details of his 4 sexual encounters with Frey, rubbing his adultery in his face. After all, Scott knows less than nothing about what happened to Laci. As for "the jury needed to see him and hear him", this is just another of the many excuses this jury hid behind. It is crystal clear that not one of them can make a case for guilt based on the actual evidence, so they parrot out all of these excuses to cover up their abject failure to judge the facts honestly. IMO Scott should have testified regardless of the sexual downside. He spoke well on tv. The weekend interview by the attorney caused the no testify decision.
|
|
|
appeals
Sept 10, 2007 20:12:48 GMT -5
Post by happyhaddock on Sept 10, 2007 20:12:48 GMT -5
IMO Scott should have testified regardless of the sexual downside. He spoke well on tv. The weekend interview by the attorney caused the no testify decision. They set Harris onto Dr March and made him look foolish, although it was actually Dr Devore who was blowing smoke with his nonsense 'theory'. I'm sure they would have done the same to Scott.
|
|