Scott Peterson-- Innocent on Death Row

[moghirl]

desperado said:

Thanks for the warm welcome.

As I appreciated reading through your Forum here, I am pleased to see that my comment was equally appreciated.

I find this site very professional and am enjoying my first visit here.

You may visit my site at: www.desperado-mountain.com/welcome/

The Mountain Forum link is the second one down from top on the left, but perhaps the entire site will serve as my introduction to you.

If anyone cares to view the Forum, they will have to register a free account. This is a small security feature I have put in place and I apologize if anyone finds it inconvenient.

The Forum is not nearly as focused as this one, but perhaps you will find other things in there that interest you also. All members are permitted to start their own topics.

I have already linked and promoted this site in the 'Polls" topic and Scott Peterson thread.

Thanks again for allowing me to participate in the endeavor you are all involved in here.

Sincerely,
RW Desperado

Had a look at you web-site, the animal photos are awesome, I love them, and will spend a happy few hours soon reading it all in-depth. Thank you Des I have a beautiful dog, my faithful friend, maybe I could post a photo on your site ? Good to have you on board, stick around, look forward to getting to know you

[sclcookie]

barbaraweaver said:

sclcookie said:

He/she was questioning his case. I don't remember exactly what was said, but it doesn't matter.

The point is, we're against the death penalty on everyone on death row and this is a support area for all dr inmates, not for debate.

If they had a question that would lead to debate, they need to bring it to the debate area, however, at the same time, respecting the DR inmates family and friends who take these debates at a personal level....in other word, don't bash the inmate who's case you're debating (referring to a recent experience I had).

I'm still not clear. Are you saying that we are not to debate specifics of the case in this area? I've been doing that for awhile in this section, that's why I'm confused.

I didn't see what Cottage posted before you deleted it but I know that poster, and she is supportive of Scott Peterson....... who is on DR.

It wasn't disrespectful at all, just questioning his case. This isn't the debate area. Other supporters of Peterson may get offended, so that's why it was deleted.....I don't catch all debates, so if something was debated prior, I didn't catch it. But there is a lot more traffic in here related to Peterson, so we're trying to keep control of his threads and make sure everything is respectful.

hugggz,
Suzanne

[CCADP]

Maggie has accepted debate in this thread since the beginning; before we started the 'debates in the debate area' thing....should we make this thread an excetion; or should we move it to the debate area? Maybe we can move it to debate and start a new Peterson thread with info for supporters and links comments etc in the Other cases section...what do u two think? I leave it to u guys...

[sclcookie]

Moving it being that it started as a debate may be good. That way people won't get confused or offended.

It doesn't matter to me. I don't know his case well enough to debate either side.

[Maggie]

sclcookie said:

Moving it being that it started as a debate may be good. That way people won't get confused or offended.

It doesn't matter to me. I don't know his case well enough to debate either side.

I didn't realize there was a debate area for this stuff I thought specific cases was the area to debate specific cases... but now that I know about the debate area fine by me to move it

Sorry for the confusion

[sclcookie]

Cool, I'll move it then.

hugggz,
Suzanne

[Maggie]

Hi to all the guests on-line today!!! ;D ;D

I urge you all to learn the FACTS in the Peterson case! Go to Scott's CCADP page and read the motions!! Check the websites listed.... it will then be easy to see why Scott is INNOCENT ON DEATH ROW!!

[jill]

barbaraweaver said:

Hi to all the guests on-line today!!! ;D ;D

I urge you all to learn the FACTS in the Peterson case! Go to Scott's CCADP page and read the motions!! Check the websites listed.... it will then be easy to see why Scott is INNOCENT ON DEATH ROW!!

Hi Maggie I made it over ! If you need any help let me know !

[cottage]

sclcookie said:

He/she was questioning his case. I don't remember exactly what was said, but it doesn't matter.

The point is, we're against the death penalty on everyone on death row and this is a support area for all dr inmates, not for debate.

If they had a question that would lead to debate, they need to bring it to the debate area, however, at the same time, respecting the DR inmates family and friends who take these debates at a personal level....in other word, don't bash the inmate who's case you're debating (referring to a recent experience I had).

Suzanne,

I'm not trying to start a problem, but I'm not sure what I said wrong in my post. I went back and read it on page 6 and I can't figure out what
I said to start a debate and what I might have said to disrepect Dr inmates, family and their friends. I was just trying to make a postive comment in regards to Scott's case. I am a firm believer in Scott's innocense and didn't realize I was posting anything different than what other's have posted under this thread. I am not a trouble maker just a firm supporter so sorry if I offended anyone. I am a she.

[sclcookie]

cottage said:

sclcookie said:

He/she was questioning his case. I don't remember exactly what was said, but it doesn't matter.

The point is, we're against the death penalty on everyone on death row and this is a support area for all dr inmates, not for debate.

If they had a question that would lead to debate, they need to bring it to the debate area, however, at the same time, respecting the DR inmates family and friends who take these debates at a personal level....in other word, don't bash the inmate who's case you're debating (referring to a recent experience I had).

Suzanne,

I'm not trying to start a problem, but I'm not sure what I said wrong in my post. I went back and read it on page 6 and I can't figure out what
I said to start a debate and what I might have said to disrepect Dr inmates, family and their friends. I was just trying to make a postive comment in regards to Scott's case. I am a firm believer in Scott's innocense and didn't realize I was posting anything different than what other's have posted under this thread. I am not a trouble maker just a firm supporter so sorry if I offended anyone. I am a she.

It's all good. I moved this thread to the debate area. You didn't state anything wrong....you're statement seemed like something that would a debate in this thread which was in a support area, however, this entire thread was a debate, so it was moved. I wish I remembered what you said, but it wasn't anything to worry about it. You weren't disrespectful at all.

hugggz,
Suzanne

[martyj]

After a great deal of deliberation and study of available information it does not take a rocket scientist to find Scott Peterson guilty Think about it his actions are proof of his guilt Murder for profit is nothing new murder to escape responsibility to his family, murder to protect his image for commiting adultery. In fact quite a few more actions are proof of guilt

[gumboqueen]

What I have learned from this case:

Never believe what the media tells you
Our justice system is only as good or as bad as the juries sitting at the trial

[mrap4]

martyj said:

After a great deal of deliberation and study of available information it does not take a rocket scientist to find Scott Peterson guilty Think about it his actions are proof of his guilt Murder for profit is nothing new murder to escape responsibility to his family, murder to protect his image for commiting adultery. In fact quite a few more actions are proof of guilt

Murder for profit? Scott stood to gain more had Laci lived. She would have inherited an estate a few years down the road. His actions? What actions? The ones the media decided to publish? There is no right or wrong way to grieve. Grieving is a process. None of us know what Scott truly felt. We are not in his his heart and mind. I personally did not see Scott as cold and uncaring. The media tried to portray him like this, but this is not what I seen. Murder to rid himself of responsibilities? Scott paid Laci's medical bills the day before. He prepared and decorated a nursery. How do you know Scott did not want to take care of Laci and this child? Protect his image? Scott had cheated on Laci early on in there relationship and Laci never told her family. What makes you think he was trying to protect his image now?

Amber was just another fling in Scott's life. He did not love her. If you really Listen to those taped calls, you can almost tell Scott was trying to brush her off in a not so obvious way. He never told Amber he loved her and he told her he wanted to take things slow. This is not a man who was in anyway obsessive of her. At one point, he suggests she go out and party, while he is supposedly away. This is not something a man who is madly in love and obsessed would do.

The media tried to portray Scott as a monster. There were those out their naive and incapable of thinking beyond what is being reported, who fell for their lies. The MPD leaked false information to the press, which they jumped on. Publishing lies about an insurance policy among other things. These rumors were later debunked, yet the media was in no hurry to publish the truth. The only ones who really know the truth, were those of us who took an interest in this case and read all of the evidence and court documents and transcripts. Other then that, there are those out there, who are still ignorant to the facts.

Bottom line is, the MPD was never able to prove Scott killed Laci. They were never able to prove he premeditated this crime. The jurors decided Scott's Fate based upon their own personal feelings and hidden agendas. Not on the evidence, because there was none. If Scott did kill Laci, it was never proven. I don't believe he would be smart enough to pull off the perfect murder and leave no evidence behind. Yet stupid enough to place himself at the place he discarded their bodies. What killer applies for a boating license to dispose of a corpse. Think about it. There are more red flags that point to innocent than there are ones that point to guilt.