Convicted By Suspicion -- Why Scott Peterson May Be Innocent

The Hollywood Investigator ^ | 11/30/2004 | J. Neil Schulman

[Verginius Rufus]

Scott had a perfectly understandable motive for killing Laci rather than divorcing her--if he got a divorce he would still have to pay child support for their son for 18 years. His best legal strategy might have been a 14th-amendment defense (equal protection of the laws): he as the expectant father was not given the same rights to dispose of an inconvenient baby than any expectant mother would have.

[Dashing Dasher]

Now that you put it that way - I'm sold.

[Rodney King]

They dont even know how Laci died, for crying out loud.

So? Her body was totally decomposed. Are you suggesting that every murderer should cremate his victim and thereby get a free pass?

[Still German Shepherd]

PS to post #79 -- NOT that the Lacy & baby tragedy is funny, but this person's theories sure are. Scott Peterson is guilty and everyone knows it. Time to move on.

[MEG33]

Murderers are convicted without the how of death proven..or the where and the why proven...

[kjam22]

YOu do agree that there were a couple of people on the jury that seemed to not think he did it..... before they were dismissed from the jury? Don't you?

[bruin66]

The outcome was right, even if the path to it was wrong.

Sounds like CBS's excuse for RatherGate, i.e., The accusation is correct even if the evidence was forged.

[MEG33]

I am sick I had not mentioned that one...

[kjam22]

Sounds like CBS's excuse for RatherGate, i.e., The accusation is correct even if the evidence was forged.

Interesting analogy.

[.38sw]

It's pretty good evidence of an unnatural cause of death when you turn up 90 miles away from your home and wash up on shore several months later, with your head and limbs missing. I don't think she went fishing that day, and fell overboard. I also don't think she walked or hitchhiked to the Berkeley marina to commit suicide. Oh, hey! I know! She died a natural death at home, and person or persons unknown decided that a burial in the bay would be nice, so they transported her there.

There have been other cases where no body at all was found, and therefore no cause of death could be established, but a conviction in the case resulted based on, shockingly, circumstantial evidence.

[Rodney King]

YOu do agree that there were a couple of people on the jury that seemed to not think he did it..... before they were dismissed from the jury? Don't you?

Yes, that does trouble me. I would not seem so strident in my defense of the system if this author was not so ridiculous as to suggest that there was no motive.

[Dashing Dasher]

You state that the jury convicted him because they hated him - and not because of the evidence...

Being that there is still a gag order...

How do you know what the jury actually believed?
Ouija Board?

[auntdot]

'...without the prosecution presenting conclusive direct or circumstantial evidence overcoming every single exculpatory scenario by which Laci Peterson might have otherwise come to her death;'

If our justice system were held to that criterion, there would be no guilty verdicts, ever.

Every clever defense council can come up with a circumstance that the prosecution cannot refute.

Could Laci have been abducted by unseen thugs who, for no good reason, abducted and killed her and then tossed her in the bay where Scott was fishing with the wrong gear?

I suppose.

But some explanations just don't make a whole lot of sense.

And that is why we have juries to weight the evidence as best they can.

[.38sw]

Telepathy.

[.38sw]

Hey, don't be sick about it. We can't all think of everything, right? Just glad I could help with alternative scenarios.

[BenLurkin]

This is close to to being a classic: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1290541/posts

[Rodney King]

Thanks!

[Graymatter]

This is the only loose end I see in this case---a cement anchor. If Peterson did the killing, why on earth would he keep one cement anchor? Why not dump them all while he's at it?

[elbucko]

Don't hold back! ; )

elbucko is not State Department material. What's worse, he doesn't care.

..;^)

[Rodney King]

This is the only loose end I see in this case---a cement anchor. If Peterson did the killing, why on earth would he keep one cement anchor? Why not dump them all while he's at it?

People in the midst of a murder/cover up don't always act completely rationally.