Prosecution claims Peterson's pickup was used to dump body

The Contra Costa Times ^ | Dec 3, 2003 | Brian Anderson

[alexandria]

These are my last few days at my Imac...my Dell came today!! I'm so excited, like a kid with a new toy!

Just watch out in throwing out those keyboard shortcuts on the Dell... it flips them out.

[Devil_Anse]

LOL. Nobody questions that Michael Jackson is a guy, either.

"Nobody seemed to question that Scott took the pliers from the house"--You're gonna need better evidence than THAT to prove a fact! If courts went by the "nobody seems to question it" standard, nothing would ever get proved!

[Devil_Anse]

Oh, give it up, RG. After all, you've only been following this case for a few months (well... okay... since the first day), and this poster has been on these threads for a LEAST 24 whole hours!

Haven't you heard about the standards of proof in a courtroom? They are:

1--Beyond a reasonable doubt

2--Preponderance of the evidence

3--Nobody seems to question it, so it MUST therefore be true

[Jackie-O]

LOL!
Did you get a chance to read LKL transcripts yet? The link I posted last night works now, they have been added.
I thought Nancy was getting some pretty tough jabs at Pixie last night.
At one point they were arguing about Snott and Amber's sexual habits, Pixie saying that a full term pregnant Amber would be "explosive" for the defense...showing that their relationship could not have been so serious if she ran out and got preggers right away.
Nancy said something like she could care less about ANYONE'S sexual habits, only if Snott's preferred lifestyle was a motive to kill his wife and child! Pixie had nada to say in response. LOL!

[runningbear]

okay...

[runningbear]

I think scaughty thinks he is a star!

Creepy ......

[runningbear]

ROFL.....

[Devil_Anse]

Thanks for your posting of LKL transcripts. I have used them many times, and you make it very convenient!!

Last night, I was able to catch the late showing of Larry King, so I had the joy of watching the participants. (I can't stand little Chris Pixie's smarmy smile...)

I found it ironic that Nancy Grace, whose law-and-order stance usually marks her as the "token conservative" on the show, was placed in the position of defending Amber's sexual looseness. But it was cool the way she did it: she simply took liberals' argument ("if it feels good, do it") and used it against the Pix-ster. "What right do YOU have to question anyone else's lifestyle?" is essentially what she said. ROFLMAO!!! Guys like Pixley get hoisted on their own petard again and again.

That said, it's not like Amber was Scott's squeeze one day, and pregnant by the chiropractor the next day. This pregnancy must have begun about July or August. So at that time, it had already been 7-8 months since Amber and Scott were anywhere near being an item.

7-8 months?? I'd wager that exceeds the lifespan of most relationships in California!

[runningbear]

it'll be continued... another 2 yrs?... times up again then....heehee..

[runningbear]

what was that movie called: "lords of flat bush"?

[runningbear]

LOL...lol...

[runningbear]

;o)

[pinz-n-needlez]

Good point, DA. This baby wasn't started until well after Amber was finished with Scotty.

Another point the pundits seem to miss, though, (and so did we last winter and spring) is that Amber did not break up Scott's marriage, or cause Scott to fall out of love with Laci.

Scott went looking for a new girlfriend, and asked to be introduced to someone, anyone. He promised to take this new mystery woman to heart (and probably to bed) sight unseen, before he ever knew Amber existed on the face of the earth.

Scott was done with Laci AT LEAST by September or October. Amber just happened to be the prey that he caught in in little hunting expedition.

She has no obligation to be 'true' to Scott, he was totally using her and setting her up, from the get-go. He was already announcing Laci's death two weeks after he met Amber. I wouldn't be surprised if his brilliant criminal mind hadn't decided that if he had a serious girlfriend when he killed his wife and 'pregnancy tissue', that the jury would understand and let him off. (If indeed, he made one small error and they got lucky and caught him, that is.)

The timline that was testified to at the Preliminary Hearing is very revealing. Amber is innocent of alienation of affection. Scott's affection was alienated months, if not years before Laci's death.

Well, nothing like a rant to get the blood flowing in the morning....

Pinz

[Devil_Anse]

You got it, Pinz! The "Ambers" in the life of a guy like Scott are interchangeable. Guys like that will tolerate anything but a reliable, constructive, regular existence. I believe that some people have to have a crisis going at all times. Perhaps these people are more used to the crisis state, than to the regular, calm, peaceful state of existence. And since Scott grew up under Jackie Peterson, I'm sure "crisis" is probably a lot more familiar to him than is peace.

So he might create the crisis state he craves, by cheating on his wife, and having to be very careful not to get caught, and knowing that if he gets caught all hell will break loose, and shivering from the excitement of it all. Kind of like he must have felt during the commission of this murder and the hiding of the body.

[HenryLeeII]

Lots of people have cement, anyone can legally buy it at the hardware store.

After having Peterson in jail for several months now, doesn't it seem kind of lazy or irresponsible on the prosecutor's part to still be saying that the substance found in his pick-up may be cement? What's going to happen if it turns out not to be cement? Does their whole theory crumble? And show me a married man who doesn't have one of his wife's hairs on a tool, scissors, etc. Hair gets around the house and doesn't disentigrate. His lawyers are going to say that he fixed something in the bathroom and the hair stuck to it.

Again, I'm not saying he didn't do it, but the case (as presented to the public so far) seems less than convincing.

[waterstraat]

. The "entire legal round table" may be members of the kitchen drawer tool set brigade, but guys with warehouses and tool boxes don't keep their pliers in the house.

Well, speaking for myself, we keep our pliers in our house/garage/basement. I guess we could take a poll to see how many freepers keep their pliers in their houses/garages, but I would think such a thing is not uncommon.

I would guess that most members of the jury also might keep their pliers in their houses too - so if thats the best you got, he'll go free.

[HenryLeeII]

The "entire legal round table" may be members of the kitchen drawer tool set brigade, but guys with warehouses and tool boxes don't keep their pliers in the house.

And how would a guy with all of his tools in a warehouse two miles away fix a leaky faucet or any other such routine task? Maybe with a pair of pliers he keeps in the home? Or, maybe he took them to the house to fix something then put them back on the boat when he was done. That's all the defense has to say, and its not unreasonable for the jury members to believe that.

I've brought tools to work and other places outside of my home, used them, then took them back home. There could be some sort of DNA evidence (hair, skin cells, dandruff, etc.) from a co-worker that gets on the tools and stays there for a period of time. Its not beyond a reasonable doubt, and in a capital murder trial, that has to be the standard. I'm not saying he didn't do it, but the evidence that the prosecutor has shown the public so far is less-than-airtight. I'm sure he's a psycho with all sorts of issues going on in his head, but that doesn't necessarily equal a murder conviction. If he is guilty and convicted, then let me be the first to say that Laci's parents should each be given a baseball bat and twenty minutes alone with him.