Scott Peterson trial - opening statements set to begin tomorrow..

[C.Ann]

Based SOLEY on the information that has been presented to date by the media - in terms of what the prosecution has to go on - could YOU give Scott Peterson the death penalty RIGHT NOW ??

I could not...

 

[grinningghost]

No. As flawed as it may be, I do believe in allowing things to go through the judicial system. So as guilty as he appears, I couldn't sentence him to anything just yet.

 

[Dan Murphy]

I have no idea, have not followed at all.

 

[Poohbear123]

He is a very Smug man I know that much! No one else has been brought forward who might have Killed Lacy, to me it doesn't look good for him.

 

[Pugdog007]

I have followed it closely. Yes, I absolutely could.

 

[C.Ann]

Originally posted by Pugdog007
I have followed it closely. Yes, I absolutely could.

-------------------------------------

How? Based on what exactly?

Do I think he's a slime ball? Yeah.. Do I think he "probably" did it? Yeah - or at the very least hired someone else to do it - but there simply has NOT been enough evidence provided up to this point to give the man the death penalty IMHO..

 

[N.Bailey]

I have followed this story fairly close too and there is no way I could convict him based on the evidence that had been presented at the preliminary, leaked, or had gotten out from another source.

I always had a problem with the fact that the prosecution insisted that this was going to be a slam dunk, yet they could not obtain an arrest warrant until they discovered the bodies. I was somewhat leery of their case from that time on.

I'm pretty sure that he had something to do with these deaths, but thinking he did and knowing isn't the same thing.

 

[Disney Doll]

Well, if one could base the judgement on circumstantial evidence I could because much of what we have learned is circumstancial.

I believe he did it.

I also believe he'll pay for it eventually, whether in this life or the next. (OJ, are you listening????)

 

[Lewski709]

I don't know anyone who could gice this man a fair trial. That is, until I read this thread and Dan Murphy chimed in. Which rock have you been hiding under? Oh, I know.....it's all those reality shows keeping you busy and diverting you attention.

 

[Pugdog007]

Motive: Amber Frey

Evidence:

He's stated he was fishing (on Christmas Eve) in the same lake in which Laci and Conner's bodies washed up 4 mos later.

He's lied to police on numerous occasions, changing his story time and time again (ie. Laci knew about the affair and was ok with it, he told police about his affair the day he reported Laci missing, etc.)

"Bleach smell" in the house when police initially searched the house.

A strand of Laci's hair found on the boat (the boat neither family even knew he had).

Blood found in his truck.

Electronic tracking that shows he visited the marina numerous times before the bodies washed up.

When arrested, he was carrying $10k cash, his brother's driver's license and he'd dyed his hair blonde.

His behavior and demeanor are not/were not that of a grieving husband and father. He attempted to continue his affair with Amber and contacted her continuously in the days and weeks following Laci's disappearance. He'd told Amber he wasn't married.

I suspect much more evidence will come out in the next few weeks during the trial (as there has been a gag order.)

However, I would convict him in a heartbeat on what I know today.

 

[momof3disneyholics]

I don't know if I could convict hime just yet, but I will be watching coverage closely!!

 

[aprilgail2]

Not only would I convict him I would be the first in line to pull the switch and fry him!!

 

[katerkat]

I'm pretty sure I could convict him... I've heard a lot of things that add up to a lot of suspicion that the defense will be hard put to remove. Which is probably why I'm not on the jury!

 

[N.Bailey]

Originally posted by Pugdog007
Motive: Amber Frey

Evidence:

He's stated he was fishing (on Christmas Eve) in the same lake in which Laci and Conner's bodies washed up 4 mos later.

He's lied to police on numerous occasions, changing his story time and time again (ie. Laci knew about the affair and was ok with it, he told police about his affair the day he reported Laci missing, etc.)

"Bleach smell" in the house when police initially searched the house.

A strand of Laci's hair found on the boat (the boat neither family even knew he had).

Blood found in his truck.

Electronic tracking that shows he visited the marina numerous times before the bodies washed up.

When arrested, he was carrying $10k cash, his brother's driver's license and he'd dyed his hair blonde.

His behavior and demeanor are not/were not that of a grieving husband and father. He attempted to continue his affair with Amber and contacted her continuously in the days and weeks following Laci's disappearance. He'd told Amber he wasn't married.

I suspect much more evidence will come out in the next few weeks during the trial (as there has been a gag order.)

However, I would convict him in a heartbeat on what I know today.

Any good attorney can argue all or most of your evidence away just as the prosecutions says it's circumstantial.

Motive: Amber Frey....many people have affairs and that doesn't prove he killed his wife.

Anyone wanting to frame him, would put the bodies at a known place that Peterson was.

The bleach smell was questionable evidence. Didn't the maid say that she used bleach in the bathrooms too? I believe someone else stated that they did not smell the bleach at all.

The strand of Laci's hair that the prosecution damaged? I'm sure we all carry hair on our clothing everyday though.

Blood found in the truck? Excuse me, was this Laci's blood? If it was, they did NOT bring it in at the preliminary.

Tracking him to the marina in and of itself proves nothing.

Didn't the 10,000 in cash come from him selling his golf access or something like that? He'd just sold it, why would it shock anyone that he had the money on him? As for the coloring of the hair, he could have done that because he was trying to hide his identity because everyone would have been pointing at him. That doesn't make him guilty either.

Agreed, his behavior was strange, but we are all different, just because we dont act like others think we should, does not make us guilty of murder.

Like I said, I believe he is guilty too, but upon this evidence, I could not find him guilty, let alone give him the death penalty.

 

[Crankyshank]

I would convict him, but I'm against the death penalty, so I would prefer he have a long and painful incarceration

 

[dzneelvr]

DisneyDoll: I totally agree. this life or the next. IF he did do it, he will get his punishment. If he didn't, he'll be fine. I would wait until all the evidence was presented and then decide based on the evidence. More obvious men (OJ....) have walked and I'm sure he wasn't the last. Our court system isn't perfect.
Maybe Scott will join OJ in searching the rest of their lives for their "loved ones" killer!!?? Too bad OJ gave up the search about a week after the trial.

 

[palmtreegirl]

I'd have to hear all the evidence before I decide whether he's guilty or not. If he is guilty I wouldn't vote for the death penalty because I don't believe in it. I prefer that the guilty sit in jail knowing they will never be free again.

 

[C.Ann]

Originally posted by N.Bailey
Any good attorney can argue all or most of your evidence away just as the prosecutions says it's circumstantial.

Motive: Amber Frey....many people have affairs and that doesn't prove he killed his wife.

Anyone wanting to frame him, would put the bodies at a known place that Peterson was.

The bleach smell was questionable evidence. Didn't the maid say that she used bleach in the bathrooms too? I believe someone else stated that they did not smell the bleach at all.

The strand of Laci's hair that the prosecution damaged? I'm sure we all carry hair on our clothing everyday though.

Blood found in the truck? Excuse me, was this Laci's blood? If it was, they did NOT bring it in at the preliminary.

Tracking him to the marina in and of itself proves nothing.

Didn't the 10,000 in cash come from him selling his golf access or something like that? He'd just sold it, why would it shock anyone that he had the money on him? As for the coloring of the hair, he could have done that because he was trying to hide his identity because everyone would have been pointing at him. That doesn't make him guilty either.

Agreed, his behavior was strange, but we are all different, just because we dont act like others think we should, does not make us guilty of murder.

Like I said, I believe he is guilty too, but upon this evidence, I could not find him guilty, let alone give him the death penalty.

---------------------------------

Very well stated!

My former DH had numerous affairs - AND a large life insurance policy on me - yet he never made any attempts to "off" me..

People can easily be framed - as mentioned above..

What household does NOT use bleach? And if there were trace particles of blood, luminol would have easily highlighted them. I have heard nothing to this point that indicates they found blood traces anywhere in the house..

Blood in the truck? Has DNA shown it to be Laci's?

Tracking him to the marina? My son-in-law comes up here to the lake every single weekend.. If my DD suddenly turned up dead, it wouldn't necessarily mean that he had killed her.. MANY people know that he comes here every weekend..

$10,000 in cash? If I sell something for $10,000 in cash I then have to GO to the bank to deposit it.. Was he on his way to the bank? Was the bank already closed for the day? Answers I have yet to hear..

Change of appearance? Ever notice all those celebs wearing the large sun glasses and out-of-their norm clothes? I wonder why they do that??

Not saying he didn't do it - just saying they need a whole lot more CONCRETE evidence before they sentence a man to the death penalty..

 

[Epcotgal8]

Originally posted by aprilgail2
Not only would I convict him I would be the first in line to pull the switch and fry him!!

You'd have to beat me to it! I have been following this case and from the evidence I've read they have like the blood stains in the hall that aren't visible to the naked eye but were cleaned and can be seen by all that CSI sort of illumination. Evidence in his boat. He went fishing close to the sight where the victims turned up on Christnmas Eve????? He had motive - a girlfriend and a pregnant wife. A distressed call to her mother not long before she was killed. Running to Mexico with a new beard, money, and his brother's passport. Guilty!

 

[yourtravelpro]

I think I would be the perfect person to serve on the jury. I was following the case very closely while she was missing and I always thought beyond a shadow of a doubt Scott was guilty. But, now I am not sure and would have to listen to both sides before I could decide. I would definitely be able to give him a fair trial.