GUILTY CA - Laci Peterson, 27, pregnant, Modesto, 24 Dec 2002 #2

[NuttMegg]

I have a theory... just go with me for a minute.

Amber is/was a bright girl. A "friend" set her up with Scott Peterson. That friend, Shawn Sibley, met Peterson at a pesticide convention and thought he would be perfect for Amber. Sibley did not know that Peterson was married. This is in 2002. Amber had a very close friend who was a homicide detective with the Fresno Police Department. Amber also had a daughter, and she was admittedly looking for a serious relationship. She was immediately taken with Peterson. Can we honestly believe that after those first couple of dates, Amber didn't call in a favor to her friend, Richard Byrd, the homicide detective, and have him check out Peterson? Now, according to the record, he did this for her on December 29, five days after Lacy's disappearance, just about a month into Amber and Scott's relationship. But allow a one-week window for human error. That would mean the conversation could have happened on December 22 or 23, right?

Amber was a massage therapist, and she drove a minivan. How difficult would it have been for her to knock on Lacy's door that morning after watching Scott leave and Lacy arrive back at the house, present her with her card, and tell her that her husband, Scott, had arranged for her to have a relaxing in-home prenatal massage as part of her Christmas gift? She brings in her massage table, gets Lacy in a vulnerable position, and kills her either by injection or strangulation. They make massage tables with locking wheels so that Amber could have opened the back gate - letting the dog out accidentally, pulled her van in, wheeled Lacy out to the minivan, and dumped her body in the back.

Everything about the case was publicized - this was the first trial by media case, thanks to the internet and 24-hour news. She could have been very calculating and dumped the body exactly where he had been fishing.

I know I will catch hell for this, but for me, Amber is reasonable doubt - watch the press conference where she delivers her statement, particularly her body language and facial movements when she says Connor's name. I have always wondered why they didn't look into her with more depth.

You don't think the police confirmed her whereabouts?

 

[Sweetluv]

Lets not forget about Scott's whereabouts...heading for Mexico with dyed hair and a large sum of cash.

 

[ilovewings]

I have a theory... just go with me for a minute.

Amber is/was a bright girl. A "friend" set her up with Scott Peterson. That friend, Shawn Sibley, met Peterson at a pesticide convention and thought he would be perfect for Amber. Sibley did not know that Peterson was married. This is in 2002. Amber had a very close friend who was a homicide detective with the Fresno Police Department. Amber also had a daughter, and she was admittedly looking for a serious relationship. She was immediately taken with Peterson. Can we honestly believe that after those first couple of dates, Amber didn't call in a favor to her friend, Richard Byrd, the homicide detective, and have him check out Peterson? Now, according to the record, he did this for her on December 29, five days after Lacy's disappearance, just about a month into Amber and Scott's relationship. But allow a one-week window for human error. That would mean the conversation could have happened on December 22 or 23, right?

Amber was a massage therapist, and she drove a minivan. How difficult would it have been for her to knock on Lacy's door that morning after watching Scott leave and Lacy arrive back at the house, present her with her card, and tell her that her husband, Scott, had arranged for her to have a relaxing in-home prenatal massage as part of her Christmas gift? She brings in her massage table, gets Lacy in a vulnerable position, and kills her either by injection or strangulation. They make massage tables with locking wheels so that Amber could have opened the back gate - letting the dog out accidentally, pulled her van in, wheeled Lacy out to the minivan, and dumped her body in the back.

Everything about the case was publicized - this was the first trial by media case, thanks to the internet and 24-hour news. She could have been very calculating and dumped the body exactly where he had been fishing.

I know I will catch hell for this, but for me, Amber is reasonable doubt - watch the press conference where she delivers her statement, particularly her body language and facial movements when she says Connor's name. I have always wondered why they didn't look into her with more depth.

Perhaps you should be writing fiction!!

 

[Cool Cats]

Thank you @Cool Cats for these thoughts. Well placed and on point. And IMO, Amber Frey is anything but reasonable doubt. She was IMO yet one other key element of the state’s well-presented and litigated case that has the convicted defendant right where all evidence says that he should be. MOO

Thanks. I appreciate that. Trials do not make room for sheer "speculation" or "what ifs" the further you move away from facts the closer you draw to fiction.

My point of view is that trials are often a long slog of both sides working to get evidence. Motions are written and it is not uncommon for multiple Motions to be written back and forth between defense and prosecution over just one piece of evidence. Both sides are trying to convince the judge of the validity or falseness of the evidence. This can lead to a full blown hearing as happened in the Bryan Kohberger case where an expert defense witness was questioned about the "GPS evidence" he claimed to have found.

I find the 6th Amendment very helpful in understanding this. The 6th Amendment gives defendants the right to see and challenge the evidence presented against them by prosecutors. The legal procedure for obtaining evidence is known as “Discovery.” Prosecutors are also entitled to "Discovery."

The Sixth Amendment also gives defendants the right to a speedy and public trial, as well as a right to have an impartial jury. Sometimes implementing gag orders, sealing court documents, wearing civilian clothing, moving the trial, and the process of voir dire (amongst other measures) can help the accused with their right to have an impartial and unbiased jury. (This is certainly the goal).

LII - Legal Information Institute | Sixth Amendment
https://www.bing.com/ck/a?!&&p=d758...L2NvbnN0aXR1dGlvbi9zaXh0aF9hbWVuZG1lbnQ&ntb=1

What Is the Right to See the Evidence Against You?

A core principle of due process is the right to see the evidence against you. Learn how this process works, what information the prosecution must share, and its limits.

legalclarity.org

Sixth Amendment of the US Constitution -- Rights of Accused in Criminal Prosecutions

Sixth Amendment of the US Constitution: Analysis and Interpretation of the Rights of Accused in Criminal Prosecutions

law.justia.com

 

[jamihuntwilliams]

Perhaps you should be writing fiction!!

I actually do write fiction. I clearly stated it was just a theory. Just looking for a discussion. My apologies if I offended anyone.

 

[bajaflash]

I actually do write fiction. I clearly stated it was just a theory. Just looking for a discussion. My apologies if I offended anyone.

I actually interpreted it as them saying just from that post you would make a great writer.

Also found your post to be an interesting theory.

 

[ilovewings]

I actually do write fiction. I clearly stated it was just a theory. Just looking for a discussion. My apologies if I offended anyone.

it is not at all offensive, just, shall I say, in my opinion, a little off the wall- you do have a good imagination!

 

[katydid23]

I have a theory... just go with me for a minute.

Amber is/was a bright girl. A "friend" set her up with Scott Peterson. That friend, Shawn Sibley, met Peterson at a pesticide convention and thought he would be perfect for Amber. Sibley did not know that Peterson was married. This is in 2002. Amber had a very close friend who was a homicide detective with the Fresno Police Department. Amber also had a daughter, and she was admittedly looking for a serious relationship. She was immediately taken with Peterson. Can we honestly believe that after those first couple of dates, Amber didn't call in a favor to her friend, Richard Byrd, the homicide detective, and have him check out Peterson? Now, according to the record, he did this for her on December 29, five days after Lacy's disappearance, just about a month into Amber and Scott's relationship. But allow a one-week window for human error. That would mean the conversation could have happened on December 22 or 23, right?

So no evidence that it happened on 22nd or 23rd, just let's pretend it was a week off...?

Amber was a massage therapist, and she drove a minivan. How difficult would it have been for her to knock on Lacy's door that morning after watching Scott leave and Lacy arrive back at the house, present her with her card, and tell her that her husband, Scott, had arranged for her to have a relaxing in-home prenatal massage as part of her Christmas gift?

OK, so why would Amber go and brutally kill a pregnant woman? Was Amber a violent type person? Or was this a sudden impulse that she had to carry out a complicated con job that ended in a double murder? Either way, it sounds improbable to me.

And why exactly did she commit the murders? She barely knew Scott. She was going to violently go kill the wife and baby of someone she hardly knew?

Who had more of a reason to get rid of Lacy and the baby---Amber or Scott? I think it is much more believable that a husband would take that awful step. Not a young woman/mother who was in a new relationship , imo.

She brings in her massage table, gets Lacy in a vulnerable position, and kills her either by injection or strangulation. They make massage tables with locking wheels so that Amber could have opened the back gate - letting the dog out accidentally, pulled her van in, wheeled Lacy out to the minivan, and dumped her body in the back.

So then Amber just happens to dump the bodies in the EXACT place that Scott went fishing that afternoon? They were probably there at the same time too. What a small world!

Everything about the case was publicized - this was the first trial by media case, thanks to the internet and 24-hour news. She could have been very calculating and dumped the body exactly where he had been fishing.

OH< so she just sat and waited around with a dead pregnant lady in her van, until she found out where Scott went fishing?

WAIT, was she trying to frame him?

Why? I thought you were implying that she killed Lacy so she wouldn't be in the way of her and Scott's new relationship? She wanted a Daddy for her little girl, right?

So why frame him?

I know I will catch hell for this, but for me, Amber is reasonable doubt - watch the press conference where she delivers her statement, particularly her body language and facial movements when she says Connor's name. I have always wondered why they didn't look into her with more depth.

If I was a juror and the defense tried to sell me that idea, I'd be certain their client was GUILTY. If that was their best alternate theory then I'd know they were really desperate.