Scott Peterson-- Innocent on Death Row

[Maggie]

injector said:

Alright, I'll be honest. I do not remember all of the facts of the case. However, how he behaved after the murder are indicative of guilt. He was more concerned about cooking chicken than finding his wife. Also, as I remember, his fishing story was pretty flimsy. Anyway, as I said, I don't remember everything about the case. Maggie, please tell why you think he is not guilty.

Are you familiar with the presumption of innocence?

Anyhaze.... how do you know how Scott Peterson behaved?? Seriously, I would like to know.... interesting that the Rocha family fully supported Scott, well into this so called "odd" behavior, until they were lied to by the MPD and manipulated with the Amber Frey BS.

I believe Scott Peterson is innocent for reasons that I think should be obvious to anyone.

By all accounts Scott Peterson is a sane and intelligent person. He has no history of violence and no criminal record.

Scott Peterson left his home the morning of December 24th at around 10:00 AM. That fact is not in dispute. He claims that his wife was alive that morning and they had watched at least a portion of her favorite show, Martha Stewart Living. Scott recalled that Martha talked about meringue. He was right- sure enough, Martha talked about meringue. That fact is not in dispute. Now- am I to believe that after Scott killed his wife and wrapped her body, he decided to watch a little Martha Stewart? No- I can’t buy that. We also know that the Peterson home computer was accessed that morning and web pages were viewed with subject matter specific to Laci Peterson’s habits. That fact is not in dispute. Am I to believe that after Scott killed Laci, he decided to do a little internet surfing for sunflower motifs and GAP scarves. No, I can’t buy that.

Scott then left the home and drove to his warehouse where he spent time sending e-mail and downloading instructions on how to assemble a wood-working machine. These facts are not in dispute. Am I to believe that while Laci’s body was getting rigor in Scott’s truck he decided to surf the net and spend over an hour assembling a tool that he would not need that day? No- I can’t buy that.

Scott then 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.

Scott came home and found his dog, still leashed, in the backyard. The dog had been found wandering alone on the street and was returned by the neighbor, Karen Servas. These facts are not in dispute. Am I to believe that Scott leashed the dog himself, and let the dog run loose before his trip to the warehouse, risking the dog would be found and returned to the alleged crime scene while Scott was away? Possibly prompting a neighbor to knock on the Peterson door? No- I can’t buy that.

Pictures were taken of Scott while he engaged in a four date affair with single mother Amber Frey. These facts are not in dispute. Am I to believe that a four date affair is motive for murder? No- I can’t buy that. Am I to believe that while Scott was allowing himself to be photographed with Amber Frey he was premeditating his wife’s murder. No- I can’t buy that.

Scott initially lied about his fling with Amber, and Scott lied to Amber about his marital status and where he lived. These facts are not in dispute. Am I to believe that lying is a rare occurrence during infidelity? No- I can’t buy that.

There is not a shred of evidence that ties Scott Peterson to the murder of Laci Peterson. Not one single thing. Nothing.

I feel strongly that Scott Peterson was convicted because of media demonization and the corrupt tactics of the MPD. Every person in this country should take note of the facts in this case versus media brainwashing. The media is powerful, and it has proven itself dangerous. An innocent man sits on death row because of the power of the media.

[injector]

Wow. That is well argued. You certainly seem to know the facts of the case a lot better than I do. Based on what you said, it is puzzling that he was convicted. However, it is hard to believe that the jury would convict him if there were not additional factors that you did not mention. I did not follow the case closely, but most people, including intelligent lawyers on TV, seem to all agree that he is guilty. I would like to read a rebuttal to your argument written by someone who knows as much about the case as yourself. Quite frankly, I am not knowledgeable enough about the facts of this case to argue about it with you. Perhaps, if I can find the time, I will read up on it. My girlfriend has a book about the case written by Catherine Crier. Maybe I'll take a look at it. I will say this, he was convicted in a court of law, and he no longer enjoys the presumption of innocence. The burden is now on the defense.

[sclcookie]

Awww, Erick. That was so nice. I mean of course you're going to put your "pro" arguements in there, but looking past all that, I really like what you said.

hugggz,
Suzanne

[Maggie]

injector said:

Wow. That is well argued. You certainly seem to know the facts of the case a lot better than I do. Based on what you said, it is puzzling that he was convicted. However, it is hard to believe that the jury would convict him if there were not additional factors that you did not mention. I did not follow the case closely, but most people, including intelligent lawyers on TV, seem to all agree that he is guilty. I would like to read a rebuttal to your argument written by someone who knows as much about the case as yourself. Quite frankly, I am not knowledgeable enough about the facts of this case to argue about it with you. Perhaps, if I can find the time, I will read up on it. My girlfriend has a book about the case written by Catherine Crier. Maybe I'll take a look at it. I will say this, he was convicted in a court of law, and he no longer enjoys the presumption of innocence. The burden is now on the defense.

Tell your girlfriend to throw that book in the trash, LOL, it's a waste..... imo.

Don't you see what you just proved to yourself???

;D

[injector]

barbaraweaver said:

injector said:

Wow. That is well argued. You certainly seem to know the facts of the case a lot better than I do. Based on what you said, it is puzzling that he was convicted. However, it is hard to believe that the jury would convict him if there were not additional factors that you did not mention. I did not follow the case closely, but most people, including intelligent lawyers on TV, seem to all agree that he is guilty. I would like to read a rebuttal to your argument written by someone who knows as much about the case as yourself. Quite frankly, I am not knowledgeable enough about the facts of this case to argue about it with you. Perhaps, if I can find the time, I will read up on it. My girlfriend has a book about the case written by Catherine Crier. Maybe I'll take a look at it. I will say this, he was convicted in a court of law, and he no longer enjoys the presumption of innocence. The burden is now on the defense.

Tell your girlfriend to throw that book in the trash, LOL, it's a waste..... imo.

Don't you see what you just proved to yourself???

;D

That basing my opinions on the case according to what a media pundit writes proves that the media decided the case as opposed to the facts? I was kind of hoping you would catch that. Where can I find accurate facts that are not presented in way designed to persuade either guilt or innocence?

[Maggie]

injector said:

barbaraweaver said:

Tell your girlfriend to throw that book in the trash, LOL, it's a waste..... imo.

Don't you see what you just proved to yourself???

;D

That basing my opinions on the case according to what a media pundit writes proves that the media decided the case as opposed to the facts? I was kind of hoping you would catch that. Where can I find accurate facts that are not presented in way designed to persuade either guilt or innocence?

There are pro-Scott websites, but you may consider them bias.... I don't..... but you might.
Try this: www.savescottslife.com/
The best source of information, imo... is the actual trial transcript...... both Prelim and trial.
I would be happy to e-mail you certain portions of testimony.
You said your girlfriend has been reading CC's book.... ask her if she has any questions. I'll try to answer using actual testimony rather than just my opinion....
How would that be?

[Maggie]

Media Brainwashing



Think it can’t happen? Think again. Consider the trial of Scott Peterson. Twelve people came back with a guilty verdict and death sentence. The law states that a guilty verdict will only be reached when the guilt of the defendant is certain….. BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT. Was there reasonable doubt in the trial against Scott Peterson? This question would be laughable if it wasn’t so tragic. The better question is was there any evidence whatsoever that Scott was guilty of the crimes he was charged with. The answer is, without doubt, NO.

How does a man sit on death row with no evidence that he committed a crime? I ask you to consider the media frenzy, the misinformation that was feed to the public on a daily basis and the fact that so called news anchors like Nancy Grace spewed twisted speculation of Scott’s guilt numerous times, every day, until the public no longer questioned it. Media brainwashing at it’s finest. The dangers of media brainwashing should be obvious to all, but let’s consider the jury pool. A FAIR trial by a jury of ones peers is a constitutional RIGHT in this country. What happens when the media is allowed to tamper with the jury pool? They have in effect, tampered with the jury. Does this report, which quoted juror number 10, sound like a person who might have gotten a little bit caught up in the pre-trial media frenzy?



"Every single night since July or August, every night when I go to bed, I am part of the Rocha family," Mylett said. "I was at Laci's baby shower. I was there for Christmas, for their graduations. When I dream at night, I'm part of their family.

"They are all very nice dreams — there isn't a nightmare among them — and it's helped me a lot because Laci is always smiling and Sharon is always smiling," she continued. "My nightmares were during the day (in court), and the dreams helped me heal at night."



Scott’s trial was far from over in July. Not only did this juror not follow the law, given she had already decided Scott was guilty and giving her nightmares in court, but she sounds downright unstable to me. Just one more growth in that admitted appellate lawyer’s Petri dish that Delucchi also called a trial.



The above being said, I've met very few people in my life that I think should qualify to sit on a jury, as media driven bias is all too alive and well. That's why I think the jury system as it is today needs to go. Morons and/or brainwashed people should not be deciding a person’s fate. The government has manipulated a system originally designed to protect us from abuse, to one where we are abused without protection. The State has unlimited powers with no accountability and somehow they have made manipulation of jurors by way of the media a perfect loophool to unlimited power. The government and the media is the most powerful “partnership” on earth. Too bad back in the day the Founding Fathers couldn't imagine such a vile partnership. Perhaps if they had, we the people would still have a chance at real justice.
__________________

Barbara Weaver
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[cottage]

Hi my name is cottage. I'm new to this board but not this case. I have ben following this case for awhile and I am 100% behind Scott Peterson. I am looking forward to the appeals and am praying that he will be sucessful if granted a new trial. I was very glad to read his message because it makes me feel good to know that he realizes the support behind him. I am in it for the long haul , but the appeal process is so long.

[cottage]

I deleted your question due to it invited a debate and this isn't a debate area.

Thanks,
Suzanne

[moghirl]

The average person has absolutely NO idea of how the media works to affect our subliminal thoughts just below the threshold of consciousness. Most of us would deny we are even capable of being manipulated in this way, but the truth is very much to the contrary. Previous to reading about the Peterson case on this board , not much had been reported in the British press, therefore, at the moment, I'm trying to filter out facts from fiction and come to a better understanding of what happened to Laci and her baby. I hate to say this, but from what the media have 'fed' me, my gut reaction is to think Scott is guilty despite trying to remain neutral, and this knee-jerk decision was made before I'd read any research into the case at all, so the media reports did a great job on me I'm ashamed to say. No wonder Maggie uses the word 'buy' so often because this is precisely what is going on, the press are 'selling' an opinion they want you to swallow and the average person's not aware of what's being done to them and at what level. Take for an example the recent attacks in London. From the Prime Minister down we were told to keep a stiff upper lip, do not let the terrorists get to us, a sort of World War 2 type of attitude to help avoid mass hysteria at what was really happening in London. Then , tragically, an innocent man is shot dead by police on suspicion of being a suicide bomber, and there was probably as much publicity about this one man than there was on the 58 victims who died and the hundreds more maimed, because this is what the 'powers that be'/ media wanted us to buy into. In no way am I demeaning the Brazilian man who was shot or his family, I just want to point out how the media manipulate our thoughts constantly.

[moghirl]

PS. Another factor I think that has gone against Scott is his and his wife's good looks but true

[realisticdee]

Hi All
I was under the impression that this was a site for those against the death pentaly. Are you only against the death penalty for those that you consider innocent? What if Scott Peterson confessed today-what would your opinion be? The seems more like a fan club. It does not matter what you believe about his innocence or guilt- you are either for or against the death penalty. When u read the gushing towards Scott Peterson, in alienates people to the issue. You do not need to think someone is innocent to believe that they should not be put to death.

[CCADP]

Hi there - the CCADP is of course against the DP for ANYONE innocent or guilty ; and we have pages for both innocent and guilty DR prisoners and fight just as hard for both.

There are many who believe that Scott Peterson is innocent; and many many more who believe he did not get a fair trial so that guilt or innocence can be fairly judged. This thread is a debate area between the two. CCADP is far from a fan club for Scott Peterson - we have existed since 1998 and all those who have contacted us regarding him are not a 'fan club' but persons - many of whom were actually pro death penalty until seeing prosecutorial and media manipulations in this case - are actually interested in justice. Forget this 'fan club' silliness; visit his page; read the nearly 100 page appelate brief and see some of the appeals issues; and see some of the silly prosecutors responses in their brief also provided on the page.
Reading a little too much NY Post

[WaterLilly]

realisticdee said:

Hi All
I was under the impression that this was a site for those against the death pentaly. Are you only against the death penalty for those that you consider innocent? What if Scott Peterson confessed today-what would your opinion be? The seems more like a fan club. It does not matter what you believe about his innocence or guilt- you are either for or against the death penalty. When u read the gushing towards Scott Peterson, in alienates people to the issue. You do not need to think someone is innocent to believe that they should not be put to death.

I, personally am against the death penalty in ANY situation, guilty or innocent.

[jonsey]

barbaraweaver said:

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

I agree with Lee Peterson. I followed this case since day one. There were many "LIES" told to the media and many of those "LIES" played a big impact on this case.
Even if you didn't follow the case you heard about this case on a daily basis. It was the opening story on many newscast. Even those little newsbreaks had what's new in the Peterson case.
Everything you hear is put in your subconscious. I do believe it did play a major role in Scott being convicted.
This is one of those "LIES" that the MPD gave the Media.

www.ktvu.com/news/2253590/detail.html
June 12: Police Believe Laci Was Drugged And Strangled

We know Laci was not drugged by toxicology reports.


POSTED: 7:18 a.m. PDT June 6, 2003
UPDATED: 12:18 p.m. PDT September 1, 2003

MODESTO, Calif. -- Police believe Scott Peterson drugged his pregnant wife with the date rape drug -- GHB -- and then strangled her in the couple's Modesto home, numerous sources revealed to KTVU Channel 2 on Friday.


Todd Pearse..interesting fellow...He was sentenced to 8+ years, but this was his THIRD stike! There are people who got their third stike for stealing a peice of pizza and spending the rest of their lives in prison, yet Todd Pearse gets 8+ yrs?

www.ktvu.com/news/2744674/detail.html
Jan. 6: Peterson Prosecutors Will Call Burglary Suspect

POSTED: 10:58 am PST January 6, 2004
UPDATED: 11:14 am PST January 14, 2004


Detective George Stough told the Modesto Bee in January that Todd and Pearce were far more cooperative than suspects usually are with police. But it has not been disclosed if the men were casing the neighborhood on Christmas Eve -- the day Laci Peterson disappeared from her home.

"It was bad luck on their part," Stough said. "(Steven Todd) said he was scared that he was going to be associated with Laci's disappearance."