GUILTY HI - Carly Joann 'Charli' Scott, 27, pregnant, Makawao, 9 Feb 2014 - #6

[puakenikeni]

Now the site is telling me it had an error and is reloading -- and losing my post in progress .. Typing quick and short to get in.

 

[Mamamerced]

Now the site is telling me it had an error and is reloading -- and losing my post in progress .. Typing quick and short to get in.

I messaged ColdPizza with my problem. Maybe you could alert her/them, also. It must be the site.

 

[Moxie_McTavish]

Moxie, any way to find those moments in the archives?

I don't know which court video has the one where he suddenly started watching the camera out of the far corner of his eye, but here is the one where he looks up and his eye bulges and he gives a very dark look. It freaked me out when I first saw it, but the look only lasts for a second or two. The video is set at the right time:

https://youtu.be/vA9W6zRmBM0?t=19m18s

 

[puakenikeni]

He is dark. The old pic of him with the beard (in the orange jumpsuit) made him look scary as he really is.

I've been pondering the problem of what someone looks and sounds like who is capable of a grisly murder, in the mind of "the public." Because there are stereotypes of both men and women whose brutality would not be questioned. For example, we watch movies featuring the Mafia, or Russian gangs, any gang really, which feature guys (sometimes women) who have no problem with torturing people and killing them and disposing of their remains in terrible ways. Or to get past those stereotypes, remember Fargo, the movie, where one guy puts another guy into the wood chipper? We accept that some people are just brutal in heart and soul.

Where I think we have a problem is where we have to reconcile an inner brutality that is masked by articulate, maybe educated, convincing presentation of a person who knows right and wrong and has a moral compass that would never ever allow them to do these things. A person who understands ethics. A person who does not hang with gangs and rather consorts with normal enough people who function well enough in society.

More stereotypes of the usual suspects: the druggie who is a shell of a person, who long ago sold whatever sold he/she had to keep getting high, or people who will do any unspeakable thing for money. Guys who brutalize women and hang out with other guys who cheer them on, because they all have the same messed up mindset. The guy who lives in a basement watching snuff *advertiser censored*, drooling, and dreaming of abducting a woman, Criminal Minds run of the mill unsub types.

I think that we think we can recognize the monsters, who hang out with other monsters, and act like brutal losers. So we're not shocked when they behave as such. Saddened but not shocked.

We are shocked when the apparently well socialized, articulate, young man with various passions about unethical practices and so forth, the guy who is posting and talking about making the world better, kills, tortures, dismembers. This just cannot be. It means that we cannot recognize evil amongst us when we meet it. Our loved ones cannot recognize it. We are not safe and they are not safe.

So I do think people want a lot of proof if they are not able to see the veil torn away from the monster. If they could see the demon looks, and know for sure the rest is a facade, it would help the jury.

OTOH, if you go by the Maui residents who comment to local news articles, they seem to be really comfortable with the idea that a boyfriend is just a hair away or a fight away or a from being a killer who chops up his ex and his baby. Honestly, those people scare me with their comments. They don't need any proof or much evidence to talk about how he needs to be put down. But maybe that's just indicative of regular commenters to crime stories, not sure. ;-)

 

[puakenikeni]

As a PS, I think, but Kapua would have the more informed opinion, that Scott Peterson, another "normal guy" monster, could have skated if Amber Frey had not come forward. The revelation that Peterson was leading a whole other secret life made it possible for the jury and the public to know that he was fundamentally messed up and not at all the doting husband -- not what he seemed to most before Laci disappeared.

I do think the other Steven is coming out in the trial. His ridiculous lies go a long way towards that, and his baby hating remarks.

 

[PeterTosh]

As a PS, I think, but Kapua would have the more informed opinion, that Scott Peterson, another "normal guy" monster, could have skated if Amber Frey had not come forward. The revelation that Peterson was leading a whole other secret life made it possible for the jury and the public to know that he was fundamentally messed up and not at all the doting husband -- not what he seemed to most before Laci disappeared.

I do think the other Steven is coming out in the trial. His ridiculous lies go a long way towards that, and his baby hating remarks.

That being said...what proof do we have? Lies? Contradiction? What is the true tangible connection. Tangible connection. No murder weapon. No DNA on Steven that can be introduced in court. What have we really?? If Laci's Petersen's body never showed up...where would Scott be?

 

[Kapua]

As a PS, I think, but Kapua would have the more informed opinion, that Scott Peterson, another "normal guy" monster, could have skated if Amber Frey had not come forward. The revelation that Peterson was leading a whole other secret life made it possible for the jury and the public to know that he was fundamentally messed up and not at all the doting husband -- not what he seemed to most before Laci disappeared.

I do think the other Steven is coming out in the trial. His ridiculous lies go a long way towards that, and his baby hating remarks.

Scott Peterson had a college education, a good-paying steady job, a nice house, and no history of violence. Laci's mother, Sharon Rocha, initially supported him. Then Amber stepped forward and we started to see that Scott was not who he pretended to be. A Modesro Bee photographer captured him smiling at a vigil for Laci. To quote Kimbrerlyn Scott, "his tone was out of context." I remember Apo asking one of the witnesses if SC normally did not display much emotion. That reminded me of what some were saying about Scott Peterson. "People grieve differently." But the jururs mentioned that photograph after the trial. So "out of context" reactions and behaviors are a big clue for most of us. They were for Sharon Rocha and for Kimberlyn Scott.

 

[Mamamerced]

That being said...what proof do we have? Lies? Contradiction? What is the true tangible connection. Tangible connection. No murder weapon. No DNA on Steven that can be introduced in court. What have we really?? If Laci's Petersen's body never showed up...where would Scott be?

Well, thankfully, a part of Charli's jaw (a part she could not live without) is in evidence. It's obvious Charli is deceased and SC was the last known person to be seen with her. We all need to remember this point when doubts surface.

 

[Mamamerced]

I don't know which court video has the one where he suddenly started watching the camera out of the far corner of his eye, but here is the one where he looks up and his eye bulges and he gives a very dark look. It freaked me out when I first saw it, but the look only lasts for a second or two. The video is set at the right time:

https://youtu.be/vA9W6zRmBM0?t=19m18s

Thanks, Moxie. I have seen that "lurker" many times during the court proceedings. It's his true and subterranean persona sneaking a peek. Hopefully, the jurors catch it, too.

 

[PeterTosh]

Thanks, Moxie. I have seen that "lurker" many times during the court proceedings. It's his true and subterranean persona sneaking a peek. Hopefully, the jurors catch it, too.

He might be on medication

 

[Moxie_McTavish]

So no blood or DNA on the 4 bra swabs.

 

[Kapua]

Audio is not working for me on the trial video. :-(

Got it about 24 minutes in...

 

[Maisiebelle]

I'm watching this. Its got sound [video=youtube;oDyqZ4xZc1w]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oDyqZ4xZc1w[/video]

 

[Mamamerced]

He might be on medication

Have you heard anything about that?
Personally i think it's the predator in him surveying.

 

[Coldpizza]

I messaged ColdPizza with my problem. Maybe you could alert her/them, also. It must be the site.

If anyone else is having problems please go to this link:

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...getting-the-Grey-Box-of-Doom-here-is-your-fix

Hope that helps. If not let me know via PM and I'll see what I can do.

Thank you

 

[Maisiebelle]

Is anyone else a bit disappointed at the lack of definitive DNA evidence? I was really hoping for something that would link him to the crime scene.

 

[Moxie_McTavish]

It's obvious Charli is deceased and SC was the last known person to be seen with her. We all need to remember this point when doubts surface.

Soooo...Gray sweatshirt tested with cell-collecting vacuum in armpits, along collar, etc., and DNA consistent with 2 individuals was obtained, but SC was EXCLUDED as one of the contributors. (think about that for a second)

It was found at Paraquats with the 32 x 30 black pants, which is the same size as the other pants found upon which Charli's DNA is present. So all of this clothing likely belongs to the perpetrator of the crime, but Steven's DNA is nowhere on any of it.

This is starting to bring up the hitman theory again for me....
I'm not sure what to think anymore.

 

[PeterTosh]

It was found at Paraquats with the 32 x 30 black pants, which is the same size as the other pants found upon which Charli's DNA is present. So all of this clothing likely belongs to the perpetrator of the crime, but Steven's DNA is nowhere on any of it.

.

One of his hairs which became inadmissible

 

[Moxie_McTavish]

One of his hairs which became inadmissible

I know they wanted to include testing on a hair found in the jeans pocket, and the hair was deemed inadmissible in court.......but do we know for certain that it was genetically linked to SC?
We know that the prosecution is very painstaking and seeks to present the DNA evidence even when it doesn't link up with Charli or SC.

 

[Maisiebelle]

Soooo...Gray sweatshirt tested with cell-collecting vacuum in armpits, along collar, etc., and DNA consistent with 2 individuals was obtained, but SC was EXCLUDED as one of the contributors. (think about that for a second)

It was found at Paraquats with the 32 x 30 black pants, which is the same size as the other pants found upon which Charli's DNA is present. So all of this clothing likely belongs to the perpetrator of the crime, but Steven's DNA is nowhere on any of it.

This is starting to bring up the hitman theory again for me....
I'm not sure what to think anymore.

Just because he may not have done the actual killing doesn't mean he wasn't there. Someone had to get Charli down to the crime scene and I doubt she would have gone there willingly with a hitman. I hope the jury will consider this when they are making their deliberations.