|
Post by Maggie on Jul 20, 2006 15:44:23 GMT -5
Art- we need to find out how many supporters want to participate. To those posting here- do you have access to any Peterson support sites or message boards? If so, do you think you could inform any member that wants to participate to come here and post on sign up list? Would that be a good idea? They could then come here and copy the draft when it's ready and send it. The owners of CCADP are very, very busy right now, but by the time we need to involve the media I will talk to them about representing us, or how that should work-- Dace has dealt with the media in the past on Scott's behalf. In the meantime.... I think we need to find out who is interested I'm sure I don't need to say this but count me in ;D
|
|
|
Post by Maggie on Jul 19, 2006 11:19:07 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Maggie on Jul 18, 2006 13:14:54 GMT -5
Dove, once we all agree to the letter and addendum we all need to send it, as many as possible. One letter will accomplish little or nothing. Hundreds of letters may raise a few eyebrows. Thousands of letters will get their attention. Art this is great!! Is this something where we can ask for a hearing? Can a citizen demand a hearing into prosecutorial misconduct? Scott's rights are limited because he has been convicted..... but what about us? A class action type thing against the government?
|
|
|
Post by Maggie on Jul 17, 2006 17:22:45 GMT -5
Art, Is jury nullification an appeal issue.... it's legal isn't it? Maybe I don't understand it?? I LOVE the letter!! Let us know the best way to proceed ;D ps- you can always donate to the Peterson's PO Box... but also keep in mind, there are many ways to contribute-
|
|
|
Post by Maggie on Jul 17, 2006 16:24:09 GMT -5
I tried to make a credit card donation and it keeps saying: "Unable to verify card". I use this card online all the time. Has anyone else donated recently and had this problem? Are you trying to use PayPal on the family website?
|
|
|
Post by Maggie on Jul 17, 2006 16:21:51 GMT -5
Maggie - It's things like this that made me quit practicing law. And of all the travesties of justice I've seen, this appears to be among the very worst. I am just at a loss of words, and that's not something I am usually known for. :-) I wonder what it will take for all parties to accept that the system is broken. The police are determining who is convicted based on who they investigate and charge and juries are convicting based on whether they like the defendant or sometimes just because he is charged. Prosecutors are violating their oath of office as if they never took it. Judges are acting as if nothing is their responsibility and too many of them seem to think they are part of the prosecution team. So much for truth and justice. If the MPD had gone after Ron Grantski they could have made at least as good a case as they did against Scott Peterson - perhaps better. See www.corpus-delicti.com/mouser.htmlAsk yourself who is in charge here? I agree with both points Happy. The system IS broken! Look how many people have been exonerated from DEATH ROW! Now, can anybody tell me a prosecutor didn't LIE when he convinced 12 people "beyond a reasonable doubt" that somebody was so guilty, they deserved to die-- yet the person turns out to be innocent. The DA in Scott's case was/is corrupt, imo. Interesting now he is a judge. Yes, the system is broken. On your last point..... I have seen speculation GALORE on the internet that Grantski is suspect. That's all I'll say about that.
|
|
|
Post by Maggie on Jul 17, 2006 16:16:12 GMT -5
I just read Geragos' closing argument again and not once did he mention that Laci was scene after Scott left. Not once. His defense should have afforded a closing argument that stated repeatedly how many times Laci was spotted after Scott left. That should have been the whole basis of his defense. He didn’t even mention it! I am really getting mad now. This is a joke! Scott is rotting away in jail, his parents are suffering emotionally, physically and financially, all their lives are ruined, and all because his attorneys never made it clear that it was impossible for him to have committed the crime, when there was clearly evidence available to do so. Once Scott gets out he should sue the state, the county, Geragos & Geragos... He deserves millions in compensation for the way this case was mishandled. Yep. IMO Geragos should have brought the witnesses in who saw Laci at the Prelim..... maybe be wouldn't be having this conversation. Art, there are so many things. Let's just hope that his appellate attys get this thing reversed as soon as possible and get him out of there!!! Better yet-- the real killers be caught-- so there will be justice for once, for the Scott Peterson family.
|
|
|
Post by Maggie on Jul 17, 2006 16:11:46 GMT -5
Maggie - It's things like this that made me quit practicing law. And of all the travesties of justice I've seen, this appears to be among the very worst. I am just at a loss of words, and that's not something I am usually known for. :-) Art, I got the feeling you were a leagle eagle What I have never understood about this case since the beginning-- is the non-stop demonization of Scott Peterson in the media! And the seemingly hefty investment so many (in power) seem to have in his guilt. Do you remember when Sharon Rocha was pushing the "Laci Bill" (the one Laci herself would not have qualified under)? By that time, she had made it known to the public that she was convinced Scott was guilty. Then we have our PRESIDENT..... Bush >:(getting all cozy with her on TV, before Scott even had a trial!! I felt like our own president was sending a message that Scott is guilty. A TV movie was made for cripes sake!! Look at all the books. Yet, when one really looks at the evidence, and lack of evidence.... and really digs into the case, a story emerges of an innocent man totally railroaded. It's sickening.
|
|
|
Post by Maggie on Jul 17, 2006 15:09:38 GMT -5
Art,
I know how you feel, believe me.
I don't have the name handy at the moment, but there was also a woman who saw Laci that day that KNEW Laci! They went to the same doctor. She was also sure she saw Laci THAT MORNING.
This case is a travesty on so many levels.
|
|
|
Post by Maggie on Jul 16, 2006 14:01:19 GMT -5
It's good news but I also think there is a serious flaw in our justice system whereby it took two years to certify the transcript. That's two full years of Scott's life wasted while they could have done this in a matter of days. How does the state plan to compensate Scott for all the years of his life they deprived him of while they stretch out this process to absurd lengths? I know Art, I agree . Scott has been a victim. One day that will be realized, imo. I'm just glad it's certified now. Some cases take numerous years for certification. Thankfully Scott has a strong support system in his family. They are all devoted to seeing Scott through this. IMO they keep him going.
|
|
|
Post by Maggie on Jul 16, 2006 7:06:53 GMT -5
This is good news.
Scott has two very good attys- imo he is in good hands. Let the appeal begin.
|
|
|
Post by Maggie on Jul 11, 2006 10:22:48 GMT -5
Exactly Plove... there are so many issues it's ridiculous. Delucchi's job to every American including Scott Peterson was to secure a fair trial. He failed miserably. He has made the US justice system a mockery, imo. In fact I wonder if Delucchi has e-mail? I would love to send him a few things
|
|
|
Post by Maggie on Jul 11, 2006 7:31:28 GMT -5
Anyone who doubts these conclusions, really needs to read the analysis. IMO- we will hear the name "Cheng" when Scott's conviction is reversed. He gave false information to the jury. I wish every single juror on the Peterson case would read the analysis! I really do! They were told lies by the corrupt Distaso, who is now a judge <shudder>, and they were told BLATANT MISINFORMATION by Cheng! Conclusions: The State had to prove that Laci and Conner washed ashore from where Scott put Laci on December 24, 2002. Distaso knew very well the critical need to establish the connection between Scott's fishing trip and the two recovery sites, and he so characterized it in the opening paragraphs of his Closing Arguments. Cheng's testimony is the only evidence the State produced to "prove" that Conner and Laci washed ashore. Cheng's analysis is seriously flawed, to the point of being junk science. He used a scientific method that could not produce consistent results He failed to familiarize himself with the recovery sites and the particular location of the bodies He mischaracterized the lower low tide as a negative MLLW He grossly exaggerated the wind conditions for April 12 He falsely stated that the lower low tide coincided with winds averaging 20 knots He had Conner coming ashore at a water level far too low to wash him over the rock breakwater Thus, the State failed to prove the most critical element of its case -- that the bodies washed ashore from Scott's fishing route. www.scottisinnocent.com/Research&Analysis/evidence/Conner/cheng.htm
|
|
|
Post by Maggie on Jul 9, 2006 7:34:36 GMT -5
It's interesting to note that in the case of Andrea Yates-- (no question about guilt there) her conviction was overturned because a prosecution expert gave false information to the jury. Her new trial is going on right now. Cheng gave false information to the Peterson juryAdd that to the petri-dish list
|
|
|
Post by Maggie on Jul 8, 2006 8:07:05 GMT -5
From PWC consulting- by Marlene Newell I have revised my analysis of Dr. Cheng's testimony. His testimony was absolutely crucial to the State's case, as it was the only "evidence" that directly linked Scott Peterson to Laci's disappearance and murder. In my revised analysis, I establish the following very serious problems with Dr. Cheng's methods and data: He used a scientific method that could not produce consistent results He failed to familiarize himself with the recovery sites and the particular locations of the bodies He mischaracterized the lower low tide on April 12 as a negative MLLW He grossly exaggerated the wind conditions for April 12 He falsely stated that the lower low tide on April 12 coincided with winds averaging 20 knots He had Conner coming ashore at a water level far too low to allow him to wash over the rock breakwater This is not nitpicking his testimony -- it strikes at the very core of the claim that the weather conditions on April 12, 2003, are responsible for Laci and Conner washing ashore. The revised analysis includes wind data from 11 different stations as well as Cheng's own employer, the USGS. Without exception, they soundly refute Dr. Cheng's claims. If any of our readers can find a wind-reporting station in the area that does support Cheng's claims, then please send me the link. Read the analysis by following this link: www.scottisinnocent.com/Research&Analysis/evidence/Conner/cheng.htm
|
|