- Joined
- Feb 5, 2009
- Messages
- 1,147
- Reaction score
- 7,411
So true with Henry Lee. Think of the Phil Spector case & his running off to hide in Hong Kong!
So what has happened to Kobi? Seems he has disappeared off the face of the planet...
Scott Peterson vs. KC - Which case had/has more evidence?*POLL ADDED*
- Thread starter trixi491
- Start date
So what has happened to Kobi? Seems he has disappeared off the face of the planet...
Ripley007
New Member
- Joined
- Nov 22, 2008
- Messages
- 1,296
- Reaction score
- 1,302
KC may be really STUPID but she's not THAT stupid. The girl knows what's she's up against. If Caylee truelly died in an acciedental way, such as crawling into the pool while mom KC was being negligent chatting on her computer or phone, she would have admitted it by now to save her self. Rest assured, Caylee was MURDERED by her mother and her mother knows it. She's betting the farm that she will get away with it. If she was a good gambler, maybe she wouldn't have ever been in this position. She's not now, nor ever has been, she WILL go DOWN and ROT for her hideous crime.
Ames
New Member
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2006
- Messages
- 5,838
- Reaction score
- 3,515
Yes, yes it was.
The Anthony case has much more evidence, and believe me I know - I followed the Peterson case every day for months until Scott's conviction. I used to have every news article bookmarked on my computer.
There were just as many wild theories about the Peterson case as with this one. Scott Peterson had cleaned up the scene at home with bleach and washed his clothes, so there wasn't much in the house. He never planted any evidence in the woods where they searched, so there was nothing except his lame fishing stories. He said he was fishing for sturgeon in San Francisco Bay, which is a huge fish, only he had no bait and no hooks suitable for that. But even that didn't convince some people.
All they had on him was the timeline, his lies on tape, the fact that he had a mistress, and then the fact that Laci and the baby washed up exactly where Scott went fishing that day. He couldn't even be arrested till the body was recovered. Most of the evidence came out in the last month of the story, and that's vastly different from the Anthony case.
In this case, Casey has been in jail off and on for months, and nothing in her story is remotely plausible. Scott was a much better liar and if he hadn't shown his hand so early by smiling at the prayer vigil, people wouldn't have clued in on him so strongly.
He was creepy and a liar, but he didn't wait 30 days to search for his pregnant wife.
There were just as many wild theories about the Peterson case as with this one. Scott Peterson had cleaned up the scene at home with bleach and washed his clothes, so there wasn't much in the house. He never planted any evidence in the woods where they searched, so there was nothing except his lame fishing stories. He said he was fishing for sturgeon in San Francisco Bay, which is a huge fish, only he had no bait and no hooks suitable for that. But even that didn't convince some people.
All they had on him was the timeline, his lies on tape, the fact that he had a mistress, and then the fact that Laci and the baby washed up exactly where Scott went fishing that day. He couldn't even be arrested till the body was recovered. Most of the evidence came out in the last month of the story, and that's vastly different from the Anthony case.
In this case, Casey has been in jail off and on for months, and nothing in her story is remotely plausible. Scott was a much better liar and if he hadn't shown his hand so early by smiling at the prayer vigil, people wouldn't have clued in on him so strongly.
He was creepy and a liar, but he didn't wait 30 days to search for his pregnant wife.
I concur and read EVERY single word of testimony presented in his case (as well as the media links). There was a Timex site at the time and 100's of sleuthers chipped in to purchase the transcripts.
He really never looked for her at all. Chatting it up with Amber was more important than hanging posters of Laci. Hanging up on mamma Peterson half way thru a voice message and laughing when Jackie tried to get him to go to Washington to see if Laci was there.
Cell phone records were a huge part of that case, too.
gamom
New Member
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2008
- Messages
- 996
- Reaction score
- 7,875
Just finished watching "The Perfect Husband, Laci's story" and it got me thinking. I did a few searches about the SP case and found an article laying out why SP should not have been convicted. Everyone of the points, made me feel stronger about a conviction for KC. What do you think?
http://www.hollywoodinvestigator.com/2004/peterson.htm
Snipped and bolded by me below:
Scott Peterson may or may not have murdered his wife, Laci, and their unborn child. But the Redwood City, California trial that has just convicted Peterson of murdering Laci with premeditation was a kangaroo court in which none of the elements necessary to achieve a murder conviction were offered, much less proved beyond a reasonable doubt.
The first element that needs to be proved in any murder trial is that a murder has occurred. There was never a determination by any California medical examiner that the cause of Laci Peterson’s death was homicide. No medical examiner was able to determine the cause of Laci Peterson's death, nor even prove to a medical certainty in what week beyond her disappearance on Christmas Eve that she died.
A thorough examination of the residence where Scott and Laci Peterson lived together, by teams of detectives and forensic experts, uncovered no evidence whatsoever that a crime had occurred there. No crime.
No forensic evidence was found in the Petersons’ motor vehicles lending any foundation to the suspicion that she had ever been transported in one of them -- alive or dead -- to the place where, months later, her body was found.
No weapon was ever produced with any evidence that it had been used to cause Laci Peterson’s death.
No witness was produced who had seen or heard Scott Peterson argue with Laci near the time of her disappearance, much less any witness who had seen Scott Peterson fight with his wife or kill her.
The only forensic evidence produced in court that even presumptively linked Scott Peterson with the death of his wife was a strand of hair that DNA analysis showed to be Laci's, in a pliers found in Scott Peterson’s fishing boat. A police detective interviewed a witness who had seen Laci in the boat warehouse where Scott stored that boat. Even in the absence of this witness statement to a police detective, the rules of forensic transference indicate that transference of trace evidence between a husband and wife who lived together is common, and not indicative of foul play.
No witness ever saw Laci in that fishing boat, nor did any witness ever testify to seeing Scott Peterson bringing a corpse-sized parcel onto his fishing boat. Thus, the fishing boat never should have been allowed into evidence, nor should prosecution speculation into his dumping her body using that boat have been permitted.
Nor was any evidence offered in court showing that Scott Peterson had engaged in any overt activities in planning of a murder. He was not observed buying, or even shopping for, weapons or poison. Police detectives found no records in his computer logs that he was spending time researching methods of murder. No evidence was offered that he ever considered hiring someone to kill her.
No evidence was offered in court indicating that Scott Peterson had any reasonable motive for murdering his wife, such as monetary gain, or to protect great marital assets that he’d lose as an adulterer in a divorce in California, a no-fault community-property state, or because Scott had some basis to believe he had been cuckolded.
So in a case without an ME’s finding of homicide or a known time of death;
without a single witness to a crime having occurred;
without a crime scene;
without a murder weapon;
without any indisputable forensic evidence linking the defendant husband to his wife’s death;
without an obvious motive;
without the prosecution presenting conclusive direct or circumstantial evidence
in summation, without the prosecution demonstrating that Scott Peterson and only Scott Peterson had the means and opportunity to murder his wife and transport her alive or dead to the San Francisco Bay in which her body was found ... how is it possible that Scott Peterson has just been convicted of a premeditated murder with special circumstances warranting the death penalty?
It comes down to this: Scott Peterson was having an adulterous affair at the time of his wife’s disappearance, and Scott Peterson is a cad and a bounder.
Scott Peterson repeatedly lied to everyone around him -- including his new mistress -- to further the pursuit of this affair. This pattern of lying was established by audio tapes of his phone conversations with his mistress that were played in court. But these tapes were played before the jury without any foundation for their playing being offered, since their playing spoke to no element required for conviction in the crime with which he was charged. And these tapes -- which were more prejudicial than probitive -- destroyed Scott Peterson's credibility to appear as a potential witness in his own defense. They served only to make the jury hate Scott Peterson.
Scott Peterson found himself at the center of a media circus, and his attempts to change his appearance and escape being followed can equally be interpreted as either avoidance of the media who were stalking him or avoidance of police who were tracking him.
The bodies of Laci Peterson and her unborn child were discovered in close proximity to the location where Scott Peterson said he had been fishing at the time of her disappearance. But those bodies were found after months of all-media publicity in which Peterson’s alibi was broadcast and published, and if Laci had been murdered by some third party, the murderer would have easily had both means and motive to dump her body at that location to convict Scott and end pursuit of themselves for that murder.
In any case where more than one explanation of a fact can be offered, the judge’s charge instructs the jury that the explanation suggesting innocence is the one they are legally required to adopt in their deliberations.
Scott Peterson was convicted at trial of murder possibly leading to a death sentence in which the trial judge allowed prosecutors to speculate in front of a jury on how Scott Peterson might have murdered his wife. Anyone who’s watched a single episode of Perry Mason or Law & Order knows the judge is charged with forbidding such speculation unless there is a foundation of facts in evidence.
No such foundation was presented indicating a method of murder in the murder trial of Scott Peterson.
In other words, Scott Peterson looked and acted guilty, and in the age of 24-hour-a-day TV news networks that have to fill up those hours with ratings-producing subjects, Scott Peterson’s trial and conviction was the perfect storm of Guilty by Suspicion.
Sounds very similar to this case, only in this case the evidence that SA is overwhelming to that against SP and he was convicted to DEATH.
http://www.hollywoodinvestigator.com/2004/peterson.htm
Snipped and bolded by me below:
Scott Peterson may or may not have murdered his wife, Laci, and their unborn child. But the Redwood City, California trial that has just convicted Peterson of murdering Laci with premeditation was a kangaroo court in which none of the elements necessary to achieve a murder conviction were offered, much less proved beyond a reasonable doubt.
The first element that needs to be proved in any murder trial is that a murder has occurred. There was never a determination by any California medical examiner that the cause of Laci Peterson’s death was homicide. No medical examiner was able to determine the cause of Laci Peterson's death, nor even prove to a medical certainty in what week beyond her disappearance on Christmas Eve that she died.
A thorough examination of the residence where Scott and Laci Peterson lived together, by teams of detectives and forensic experts, uncovered no evidence whatsoever that a crime had occurred there. No crime.
No forensic evidence was found in the Petersons’ motor vehicles lending any foundation to the suspicion that she had ever been transported in one of them -- alive or dead -- to the place where, months later, her body was found.
No weapon was ever produced with any evidence that it had been used to cause Laci Peterson’s death.
No witness was produced who had seen or heard Scott Peterson argue with Laci near the time of her disappearance, much less any witness who had seen Scott Peterson fight with his wife or kill her.
The only forensic evidence produced in court that even presumptively linked Scott Peterson with the death of his wife was a strand of hair that DNA analysis showed to be Laci's, in a pliers found in Scott Peterson’s fishing boat. A police detective interviewed a witness who had seen Laci in the boat warehouse where Scott stored that boat. Even in the absence of this witness statement to a police detective, the rules of forensic transference indicate that transference of trace evidence between a husband and wife who lived together is common, and not indicative of foul play.
No witness ever saw Laci in that fishing boat, nor did any witness ever testify to seeing Scott Peterson bringing a corpse-sized parcel onto his fishing boat. Thus, the fishing boat never should have been allowed into evidence, nor should prosecution speculation into his dumping her body using that boat have been permitted.
Nor was any evidence offered in court showing that Scott Peterson had engaged in any overt activities in planning of a murder. He was not observed buying, or even shopping for, weapons or poison. Police detectives found no records in his computer logs that he was spending time researching methods of murder. No evidence was offered that he ever considered hiring someone to kill her.
No evidence was offered in court indicating that Scott Peterson had any reasonable motive for murdering his wife, such as monetary gain, or to protect great marital assets that he’d lose as an adulterer in a divorce in California, a no-fault community-property state, or because Scott had some basis to believe he had been cuckolded.
So in a case without an ME’s finding of homicide or a known time of death;
without a single witness to a crime having occurred;
without a crime scene;
without a murder weapon;
without any indisputable forensic evidence linking the defendant husband to his wife’s death;
without an obvious motive;
without the prosecution presenting conclusive direct or circumstantial evidence
in summation, without the prosecution demonstrating that Scott Peterson and only Scott Peterson had the means and opportunity to murder his wife and transport her alive or dead to the San Francisco Bay in which her body was found ... how is it possible that Scott Peterson has just been convicted of a premeditated murder with special circumstances warranting the death penalty?
It comes down to this: Scott Peterson was having an adulterous affair at the time of his wife’s disappearance, and Scott Peterson is a cad and a bounder.
Scott Peterson repeatedly lied to everyone around him -- including his new mistress -- to further the pursuit of this affair. This pattern of lying was established by audio tapes of his phone conversations with his mistress that were played in court. But these tapes were played before the jury without any foundation for their playing being offered, since their playing spoke to no element required for conviction in the crime with which he was charged. And these tapes -- which were more prejudicial than probitive -- destroyed Scott Peterson's credibility to appear as a potential witness in his own defense. They served only to make the jury hate Scott Peterson.
Scott Peterson found himself at the center of a media circus, and his attempts to change his appearance and escape being followed can equally be interpreted as either avoidance of the media who were stalking him or avoidance of police who were tracking him.
The bodies of Laci Peterson and her unborn child were discovered in close proximity to the location where Scott Peterson said he had been fishing at the time of her disappearance. But those bodies were found after months of all-media publicity in which Peterson’s alibi was broadcast and published, and if Laci had been murdered by some third party, the murderer would have easily had both means and motive to dump her body at that location to convict Scott and end pursuit of themselves for that murder.
In any case where more than one explanation of a fact can be offered, the judge’s charge instructs the jury that the explanation suggesting innocence is the one they are legally required to adopt in their deliberations.
Scott Peterson was convicted at trial of murder possibly leading to a death sentence in which the trial judge allowed prosecutors to speculate in front of a jury on how Scott Peterson might have murdered his wife. Anyone who’s watched a single episode of Perry Mason or Law & Order knows the judge is charged with forbidding such speculation unless there is a foundation of facts in evidence.
No such foundation was presented indicating a method of murder in the murder trial of Scott Peterson.
In other words, Scott Peterson looked and acted guilty, and in the age of 24-hour-a-day TV news networks that have to fill up those hours with ratings-producing subjects, Scott Peterson’s trial and conviction was the perfect storm of Guilty by Suspicion.
Sounds very similar to this case, only in this case the evidence that SA is overwhelming to that against SP and he was convicted to DEATH.
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2005
- Messages
- 4,758
- Reaction score
- 36,858
No comparison really IMO. CASEY wins hands down. Besides a mountain of circumstantial evidence, there are strong forensics.
SP's car never smelled of death, had body shaped stains in the trunk, adipocere deposits on the exterior of trash bags contained in his car and on his trunk liner itself.
The hair they found belonging to Lacy that was caught in SP's wrench or whatever didn't have a death band.
Lacy wasn't found with an assortment of items from her home.
Lacy was reported missing by SP the same day he killed her.
SP's lies don't even come close to those of ICA.
SP had the intelligence to sit emotionless in court and allow his lawyers to defend him.
He was engaged by listening during trial and didn't groom himself constantly or doodle.
He didn't flirt with his lawyers or touch them. He certainly didn't rub his chest against their arms or punch them for attention.
SP, if found innocent had the skills to be employed, pay taxes and contribute to society, ICA is and will always be a burden to those around her IMO.
SP's car never smelled of death, had body shaped stains in the trunk, adipocere deposits on the exterior of trash bags contained in his car and on his trunk liner itself.
The hair they found belonging to Lacy that was caught in SP's wrench or whatever didn't have a death band.
Lacy wasn't found with an assortment of items from her home.
Lacy was reported missing by SP the same day he killed her.
SP's lies don't even come close to those of ICA.
SP had the intelligence to sit emotionless in court and allow his lawyers to defend him.
He was engaged by listening during trial and didn't groom himself constantly or doodle.
He didn't flirt with his lawyers or touch them. He certainly didn't rub his chest against their arms or punch them for attention.
SP, if found innocent had the skills to be employed, pay taxes and contribute to society, ICA is and will always be a burden to those around her IMO.
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2005
- Messages
- 4,758
- Reaction score
- 36,858
I noticed that too Lambchop.
My guess is Mrs. Baez is watching these hearings too and had put her foot down. Defending a client is one thing and appearing like her grieving lover is quite another. :twocents:
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2004
- Messages
- 28,865
- Reaction score
- 148,013
Mmmm... No! Laci wasn't just a wife going jogging by herself- she was an 8 mo. pregnant wife "supposedly" walking her dog on the day before Christmas and the dog came back without her. Of course, now we all know that's not what really happened!
LE did immediately act upon Laci being reported as a missing person, as it was a highly unusual circumstance, and the baby would've been in danger as well...
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2004
- Messages
- 28,865
- Reaction score
- 148,013
And with Casey we have the boyfriend who said he didn't want little girls around, but revenge against her mother is probably just as strong, if not a stronger motive. It could have been both!
I remember avidly watching Greta V. Sustern (sp?) and others when the Peterson case was happening. The time line was incredible and still after watching the shows I thought well he could get off. And then the jury came back and said "he had been thinking about killing his wife for some time". This I had never heard.
My point is the prosecution is going to nail this case down with so much evidence that we know about and EVIDENCE we do not know about. We think we know the dynamics of the household, but we really do not know how bad it was in that house, imo.
It is always worse than what we think we know. Looking at the Hinkey Timeline, the amount of money that was stolen by KC is incredible in January 2008 alone - close to 2000. We don't have the previous two years. After January 2008, it is just incredible. Never less than hundreds of dollars a month. Cindy out and out lied to the State about this. This is just a small example of what was going on.
And when they get finished with the family, they will start with the friends and the lies (which is admissable if it goes to character and Caylee).
Then they will bring in the pictures. The tapes of her lying, the phone calls from prison (all they care about is Caylee).
And then they will bring in the child's horrific death and the last time she is seen and fast forward six hours and KC is at Blockbuster.
I won't be watching HLD - with JVM. I have yet to see a show of hers on this case where she or one of her guests has the facts wrong.
By the way Baez attempted in these hearings to exaggerate time lines (e.g. three months passed before Vass got air sample (actually six weeks); Yuri being told the car smelled like death when he returned from Sawgrass with KC (he was told when he arrived). Things like this Baez tries to get away with - it won't happen.
IMO, KC is going to prison for the rest of her life.
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2004
- Messages
- 28,865
- Reaction score
- 148,013
My responses are in red. I live locally and followed this case very closely. Scott and Casey are two peas in a pod. Scott did murder to be free from parenthood, be single, and be with his lover. Scott was also in financial trouble, so he may have also stood to benefit from whatever life insurance policy Laci may have had...
Just saw a show on Scott Peterson and the bodies were found in an area that he said he had been fishing "area" is key word. He put himself there. Unless I am reading your reply wrong. The poster did not say the Berkeley Marina - you did and yes that is where he purchased his ticket. I believe the poster said the area where he had been fishing - big difference.
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2004
- Messages
- 28,865
- Reaction score
- 148,013
Scott researched the tides because he planned to dump her in the Bay. He told his girlfriend 3 weeks before he killed his wife, "this will be my first Christmas without her"!!!
He bought a secret boat. Then there were the phone tapes of his conversations with his girlfriend.Laci had apparently found the Christmas card from Amber the girlfriend and was ready to leave him, but decided to stick out the holidays (Christmas) and put on a good show for her family.
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2004
- Messages
- 28,865
- Reaction score
- 148,013
Brooks Island, where he dumped the bodies is nearby to Berkeley and Richmond, and the Richmond-San Rafael bridge, but the bodies most likely drifted from where he dumped them... He had taken his boat out to Brooks Island. There isn't proof he did any actual fishing.
F.Y.I., I was at the pier and Berkeley Marina just yesterday afternoon...
Scott researched the tides because he planned to dump her in the Bay. He told his girlfriend 3 weeks before he killed his wife, "this will be my first Christmas without her"!!!
Laci had apparently found the Christmas card from Amber the girlfriend and was ready to leave him, but decided to stick out the holidays (Christmas) and put on a good show for her family.
I know all of this Linask - I was obsessed. Did not think there would be another like it and then along comes KC. Two sociopaths.
Yeah, I use to live in Berkeley. Adorable place.
I never thought the fact that the bodies were found in close "proximity" to where he said he was fishing was much "proof" but apparently others did. The timeline of his activities is what got me. Of course, he did not go fishing. He went there to get rid of Laci.
Scott researched the tides because he planned to dump her in the Bay. He told his girlfriend 3 weeks before he killed his wife, "this will be my first Christmas without her"!!!
Laci had apparently found the Christmas card from Amber the girlfriend and was ready to leave him, but decided to stick out the holidays (Christmas) and put on a good show for her family.
I got the impression from the jurors question and answer segment that he was thinking of killing Laci a lot longer than three weeks prior.
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2004
- Messages
- 28,865
- Reaction score
- 148,013
At the time I had discussed the case with my brother, who is a lawyer. He thought the bodies turning up in proximity to where Scott placed his own alibi was the big white elephant in the room. I think Scott should've gone with the golf course in Modesto for his alibi:twocents:, but I think Scott was trying to distance himself from where Laci supposedly disappeared, rather than where she'd turn up. (He shot himself in the foot on that one! Thought he'd weighted her down well enough).
Come to think of it, in both cases we had a mysterious invisible kidnapper!!!
Guardians Monthly Goal
Our goal for the month is 50 new Guardians members to sign up. Have you been thinking about becoming a member?
Click here to find out how!
Online statistics
- Members online
- 55
- Guests online
- 1,343
- Total visitors
- 1,398