Peterson seen driving to marina 3 times

SFChronicle.com ^ | November 14, 2003 | Henry Lee

[Lucy Lake]

Would you think with a body to dispose of, his motivation would overcome his fear, regardless of the lighting?

[STOCKHRSE]

CO, the probative value is that she has no direct knowledge of the time, place,and participants of "Actus Reus" and that would materially help my client (if he were my client).

I do not think a judge is likely to refuse, especially if she is likely to testify against my client at a later date.

It is BS CO, but everything is at this point.

IMHO this judge will allow anyone to testify since no jury is present.Besides CO, Anse got so upset at the possibility, her angst convinced me more.

Really Co, it is not my intent to upset a good conviction, but at this point there is no good conviction and Anse has agreed to that off-line. Normally I would not relate that but she/he has gotten very aggressive. I mean, she/he has invited me on-line to kiss his/her ass simply b/c I offered advice.....;-0). She did apologize off-line(character shows).


I really can't understand why she thinks I would owe her that favor.....GEEZ! me hopes it's she.....;-0)

Ah mean, look at my tag line, it's just my opinion! Submitted rhetorically. "Ah guess she never herd ah rhetorically"

Remember when we all swore to be nice to each other....;-00)

[Sandylapper]

Thanks, julie. You have boated at night with lights in a bigger boat that had some kind of headlights, right? That is a little boat that Scott had, and he would need rigged lights, I think. Not sure about that, but I have not seen any lights on that boat.

SP had, as far as we know, never had that little boat out on the bay before. Of course, we know he would have been desperate to rid himself of a body, but would he have been willing to take that kind of risk of placing himself on a boat without lights and going out that far? Hard to believe. We know he "liked" himself quite a lot. Heh heh. A little understatement there for humor.

[Sandylapper]

I know and you know and the whole world knows by now what the autospy report says, CO, but it doesn't mean that everybody believes that. It's a mighty hard sell. Frankly, I'd never heard of a coffin birth, but would be willing to buy that part if they've found any anchors. As to Conner and the tape that was around his little neck, well, that's another story.

[Sandylapper]

Believe you are in the same frame of mind that I am, Ray, that this has now become a "game" between prosecution and defense, and you and I want to know what's factual/logical and what's emotional. The case on surface was highly emotional--how could anyone premeditate and murder a 7 1/2 month pregnant, beautiful, almost perfect wife? What kind of a monster is this? And, of course, every woman and most men want to see him strung up.

Once it gets in the court system, it's another story--it becomes a game--who's got what? Prosecution vs. defense--not who did this horrific, unspeakable thing to poor Laci, but did Scott do it? As things unfold, we'll see who did what, when, where and how and they will lead to the truth, or at least, we hope they will. Court records are written for history,--and facts will be documented. Sorry, emotions not allowed, unless you have a jury completely stacked with emotional people. JMO

[cinFLA]

Thanks, julie. You have boated at night with lights in a bigger boat that had some kind of headlights, right?

Most night boating is done WITHOUT headlights.

[RGSpincich]

The moon was full on the 21st and at about 89% on the 23rd if I remember correctly. I'll try to find that source.

[Sandylapper]

So, it was "moonlight bay", huh? Possible. On that kind of "untested boat"? Well, possible, of course, but now we really need "David" to testify, I suppose.

[drjulie]

"SP had, as far as we know, never had that little boat out on the bay before. Of course, we know he would have been desperate to rid himself of a body, but would he have been willing to take that kind of risk of placing himself on a boat without lights and going out that far?"

He would have to have some kind of light - I wonder if the police have checked that out. Yes, I do think he'd be willing to take that kind of risk.

[drjulie]

"Most night boating is done WITHOUT headlights."

We at least put a light on the back of our boat so that others can see us. Moonlight certainly helps with visibility.

[Sandylapper]

Agreed--he'd have to have some kind of good light--not just a flashlight, I would think. Of course, there was almost a full moon, RG said, and that would help. Still, they haven't come up with any anchors or other body parts from that particular area, and I'm hard pressed to believe that the strong undertow took everything out to sea--anchors and all.

[Canadian Outrage]

The reason I said that Geragos MUST show the Judge that Amber can be a benefit to their case and that he (The Judge) likely will not allow her to testify for the defense is this: All of the Lawyers both Prosecutors and Defense Attorneys alike agreed that it was Very Unlikely that the Judge would grant Geragos's request. They didn't explain why but they all agreed so I suppose we will wait and see. Johnny Cochran of course needed to get a comment in that this Judge seems to be PRO-Prosecution. I think he's just a no nonsense Judge. At least he doesn't appear to be into Geragos's gamesmanship. There is also, as the Attorney's explained, a real danger to the Defense if they call Amber and attempt to get into the "previous bad acts" scenario. If The Defense opens that door, then the Prosecution may do the same with Peterson. And the only way that Peterson can defend himself is to take the stand. I feel fairly confident that neither Peterson or his Lawyers would be willing to do that. Most of the Lawyers seemed to think it was grandstanding. I guess we will see. As to upsetting a good conviction. You aren't doing that. My convictions are my convictions. I'm willing to be proven wrong, but I don't expect it at this point. That's just my opinion. Laci deserves Justice Ray and living with the Law Myself and working with Lawyers every day I know how Prosecutions work. Most Prosecutors are EXTREMELY careful.They are very unwilling to prosecute weak cases. They do NOT want to get their Ass whipped and I can understand that. They carefully go over their "case" and then that case is reviewed by higher ups before they even proceed to charge a case. In a death penalty case, I cannot believe that the Prosecutors and their Superiors would embark on such a venture if they had a very weak case. Just have never seen it happen. If anything, I always found them to be too careful. I am very anxious to "hear" Peterson's own voice. That just might solve everyone's disagreements. Also, I don't hold grudges so relax. However, I also don't believe we need to suspect everything that moves and attach dishonest motives to hard working LE officers who have spent untold hours of overtime chasing down leads and verifying certain facts. The fact that they may not have taken an interest in certain eyewitnesses is understandable. Those people have basically ruled themselves out through the evidence gathered from Laci's body. Even Pixley said, that the pants match is a "problem" for the Defense and likely the most compelling piece of evidence he has heard so far. We may also find that Peterson may have left a fingerprint on the Duct tape. I believe some real surprises are in store for us. THAT'S JUST MY OPINION!!

[Canadian Outrage]

grizz someone DID verify that moon phase. May have even been Diver Dave or RGS!!

[Canadian Outrage]

I wasn't intimating that the undertow would take the anchors away. Looser parts probably. Also do you not recall when the searching was going on that it was reported that there was a tremendous depth of pure silt at the bottom of the Bay. It would be tough slugging because the divers would basically have to be digging. The parts may very well STILL be there but be buried. OTOH we don't know yet what the box of 31 items contains. We don't know what the wiretapped evidence will reveal etc. I am sincerely convinced that the Prosecution team has saved their best evidence for a Jury.

[RGSpincich]

Still, they haven't come up with any anchors or other body parts from that particular area,

Be patient, grasshopper. We didn't know about the gun until the officer who took it testified that he did indeed take it from SP's glove box. The prosecution is not finished presenting it's case.

[Sandylapper]

I sure hope you two are right, but if I were prosecution at this point in time, I'd be slugging through all that evidence and finding something pretty good I had to offer besides the hair.

So, you guys think they're playing a "concealed hand"? Sorry, but I think they're bluffing, and I'd play a pretty good card right now. Never said I was any good at poker. LOL

[Canadian Outrage]

Good advice!!

[hergus]

...the Modbee got the story about when the insurance was purchased (summer 2002) from one of the Rochas.

Source please?

This isn't new info about the date the insurance was purchased, I had it on my evidentiary quote page for months.

I had Scott's quote in Sawyer's interview concerning the purchase date of the insurance and confirmation in the media.

I don't have it at hand this minute. But it's been several months since I posted that to my website, so the date the the media reported the correct information was months ago.

[Sandylapper]

Geragos/McAllister revealed or wormed that tidbit in the court transcripts. The transcripts said that MPD knew that the dates of both policies were January 2001.