Scott Peterson vs. KC - Which case had/has more evidence?*POLL ADDED*

Scott Peterson vs. KC - Which case has/had more evidence in favor of the prosecution?

  • Casey Anthony

    Votes: 645 90.1%
  • Scott Peterson

    Votes: 71 9.9%

  • Total voters
    716
Mark Furhman was talking to FOX News right before the start up today, and Scott Peterson was brought as a comparison to Casey, and the verdict in the end.

He thinks that Casey will get the death penalty - Said that in California, getting the DP is extremely difficult, that the State of Florida has much more circumstantional evidence than was ever had in the Peterson case, and, also, that at least SP appeared to have a personality that could have won the jury over.

Sure hope he is right ~
 
Great, great question!
clapping.gif
 
Have you ever seen a woman 8.5-9 mos pregnant JOGGING? I knew that was a bunch of hooey.

There most certainly are women who jog up until the end of their pregancy. But from what I have read she was walking the dog not jogging. I'm torn on both of these cases because of the lack of evidence. I mean, particularly in the SP case, the cadaver dogs never picked up a scent anywhere including the house, the truck, the boat or the warehouse.
 
I think the case's are similar evidence wise. Peterson had the cement anchors he made and the hair. Not much more if anything than Caylee's case. He acted suspicious and Casey acted even more suspicious.

With Westerfield there wasn't much either. Wasn't there 1 hair there too in his drying or bed and a partial finger print in his motor home. They tried to say she had been it it before.

Both those men are on death row. Both acted suspicious but not loads of evidence. I hope this is a good sign for Casey too except she is a young girl and they were men. Might make a difference. I think some jurors may think it was an accident and she was afraid to tell. They may have their own version like she put the body in the field because she was scared and scared to tell anyone she drowned. I pray the juror convicts her of 1st degree murder tho.
 
In the DT's opening statement, they pretty much dismissed the nanny scenario and decided to go with an accidental drowning. If there really was a nanny who stole the child, why would they claim that the child accidentally drowned? Personally, I think bringing in the drowning was a big mistake. Had they stuck to this nanny story line, they could have continued to claim that the nanny did it, that the nanny had access to her car/home/etc., and that Casey thought that Caylee was in the nanny's good care after June 16th, which is why she was so happy at all of her Fusian parties. As far as their not being a Zenaida Gonzalez, that could have been a case of fraud and false identity (as in the nanny used a fake name and fooled Casey since the beginning). Now, I still think this would have been a load of crap, but I think that would have been more likely to create reasonable doubt than completely switching gears and claiming it was a drowning. I think they definitely have more evidence pointing to the cause of death being a murder than they do to definitively linking Casey as the murderer.

IMO your approach has great merit. I've wondered if Johnny Cochran were still with us, and had taken the ICA case, what defense strategy he would have used. I think your construct is about the best defense plan I've heard, assuming ICA were pleading innocent with no plea bargain.

I agree the pool drowning story was probably DOA with the jury and with any thinking person.

Since CA (if we can believe her) was still searching for Zanny six weeks ago, the pool theory requires that GA hid the truth of Caylee's pool accident from CA for almost 3 years. That strains credulity.

Not sure why JB didn't follow your advice and ride the kidnapping story to the hilt (and also leave out the foolish and unnecessary Roy Kronk angle).

:waitasec::bricks::waitasec:
 
Who can forget Scott Peterson calling Amber Frey pretending to be in Paris ringing in the New Year with his imaginary friends Pasqual and Francois - it was so amazing - they were playing American pop music .... all the while he was really in Modesto, CA at a candlelight vigil for his missing wife Laci and unborn son Connor.
 
Fear not. We are a long way from cases like the Laci/Connor Peterson and OJ. Forensics have come a long way since then as well as the microscope of the media on these types of cases. If I recall correctly, the phrase "person of interest" was coined during the Peterson case.
LE and SA have been held to the highest standards since the inception of cameras in the courtrom and public interest in cases since the OJ case, so I have no doubt that Florida is fully prepared for this case. They have the finest forensic investigators analyzing the evidence for this most bizzare case and all the time in the world to build thier case and decide what punishment will apply.
If this case is televised...if it ever goes to trial without a plea, I will need to take a vacation...an extended one.
:seeya:Have a nice time!
can I come? lol
 
I think because of our Sunshine Laws, we saw much more of the evidence early on and were aware of the depos and all.
 
IMO your approach has great merit. I've wondered if Johnny Cochran were still with us, and had taken the ICA case, what defense strategy he would have used. I think your construct is about the best defense plan I've heard, assuming ICA were pleading innocent with no plea bargain.

I agree the pool drowning story was probably DOA with the jury and with any thinking person.

Since CA (if we can believe her) was still searching for Zanny six weeks ago, the pool theory requires that GA hid the truth of Caylee's pool accident from CA for almost 3 years. That strains credulity.

Not sure why JB didn't follow your advice and ride the kidnapping story to the hilt (and also leave out the foolish and unnecessary Roy Kronk angle).

:waitasec::bricks::waitasec:
nothing would have been gained by sticking with the zanny nonsense, it would have been worse imo - at least with the drowning pitch the defense could take a stab at telling the jury that their liar of a client was finally coming clean, fessing up to the truth, as hard as it was for her to do. and that the zanny lies (and her 31 days) were the result of trauma.

zanny: hopkins never knew her (even tho he was the one that was supposed to have introduced them), no one had ever seen her, zanny didn't live where casey said she did, zanny's relatives didn't live where casey said they did, casey couldn't cough up one phone number for zanny, someone who cared for her child for over two years, it wouldn't have explained her 31 days of partying because casey said zanny kidnapped caylee prior to the 31 day spree, on and on and on...
 
Wasn't there a lot of blood in the Peterson home that had been cleaned up but still indicated a large amount, not just something from a minor injury?

Okay, as I'm googling I'm not finding anything about blood, so maybe not...
 
Don't hang me please The biggest differnce I see between the two cases is the way the two DA offices prsented the cases. In the Peterson case I had no doubt I knew where he was headed to spend his time for ever. In this case. I still think Casey is going to get Life in prison I do not see the Death peanlty here. It was not proven beyond resonable doubt IMHO. :truce:
 
Don't hang me please The biggest differnce I see between the two cases is the way the two DA offices prsented the cases. In the Peterson case I had no doubt I knew where he was headed to spend his time for ever. In this case. I still think Casey is going to get Life in prison I do not see the Death peanlty here. It was not proven beyond resonable doubt IMHO. :truce:
Do you mean Jodi??? Casey and her both deserve the Death Penalty, but right now only Jodi will get it...
 
Why does this thread keeping popping up like a new posting when there is none?
 
I've always been convinced if Casey had been a man, she'd be rotting in jail right now.
 
Hm. Kind of surprised by the overwhelming votes toward Casey. However, I think the reason Casey got off was because of the verdict they were going for, had they went with negligence, or 2nd degree she'd probably be in jail.

I've read a lot about both cases, but way more on the Peterson case, and yes, the physical evidence is lacking, but for me, the guilty verdict had never been more obvious with such a slim amount of actual evidence. There's no question in my mind that Scott deliberately and thoroughly murdered his wife and unborn child: the phone calls to Amber Frey, the behavior (or lack thereof), driving up to the pier everyday, disguising himself, attempting to flee to Mexico, saying his wife had died just a week or two before she actually did. He said he went fishing, where his wife's body was found, and there was those pliers with Laci's hair as well. In terms of digging your grave Scott did that far more than Casey. Scott probably thought he was smart enough to get away with the crime, through meticulous planning and covering up, it was his own stupidity that got him convicted.

Again, they're both guilty, but I think there's a reason why Casey is free and Scott isn't.
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
135
Guests online
1,036
Total visitors
1,171

Forum statistics

Threads
589,928
Messages
17,927,789
Members
228,003
Latest member
Knovah
Back
Top