Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

SCOTT BURNED IN RAGE
The NY POST ^ | June 10 2004 | Howard Breuer

Posted on 06/10/2004 5:28:09 AM PDT by runningbear

ALL EXCERPTS:

SCOTT BURNED IN RAGE

SCOTT BURNED IN RAGE

By HOWARD BREUER

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

June 10, 2004 -- REDWOOD CITY, Calif. — Scott Peterson was more distraught when he burned chicken at a family barbecue than the night his pregnant wife Laci vanished, a witness testified yesterday.

Laci's cousin, Harvey Kemple, also said that Peterson gave conflicting stories to relatives regarding his whereabouts on the day of the tragic mom-to-be's disappearance.

"I saw more reaction out of him when he burned the God-darned chicken than when his wife went missing," Kemple said at the fertilizer salesman's double murder trial.

Kemple, a self-proclaimed grill guru, said he tried to give Peterson tips on how best to cook the chicken during a July 4 backyard barbecue just months before Laci's disappearance.

But Peterson, 31, wouldn't listen, and became visibly.......

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Peterson Relative Says He Noticed Inconsistencies

Peterson Relative Says He Noticed Inconsistencies

By CAROLYN MARSHALL

Published: June 10, 2004

EDWOOD CITY, Calif., June 9 - Statements made by Scott Peterson to relatives of his missing wife, Laci, were so inconsistent, one family member testified on Wednesday, that he secretly followed Mr. Peterson to a shopping mall and a golf course to see if something was amiss.

"I was very suspicious from that first night," said the relative, Harvey Kemple, in testimony at the murder trial of Mr. Peterson, who is accused of killing his wife and unborn son. "That's why I followed him to the mall, hanging back a bit to see what was happening."

Mr. Kemple, who is married to a cousin of Ms. Peterson's mother, said he was put off when Mr. Peterson told him that he had been playing golf on Dec. 24, 2002, the day Ms. Peterson disappeared, because Mr. Peterson had told Mr. Kemple's .......

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Peterson defense homes in on witness discrepancies to create reasonable doubt

Peterson defense homes in on witness discrepancies to create reasonable doubt

By Associated Press

Thursday, June 10, 2004

REDWOOD CITY, Calif. - Scott Peterson assured some of his in-laws he was fishing the day his pregnant wife disappeared, although he told one member of his extended family and a neighbor that he had been golfing.

It's a contradiction prosecutors in Peterson's capital murder trial revisited several times Wednesday in their effort to assert that Peterson switched his alibi after saying he returned to an empty home on Christmas Eve day, 2002.

Peterson, 31, ultimately told authorities he went fishing alone on San Francisco Bay. ..........

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Surveillance gets a satellite assist

Posted 6/9/2004 10:31 PM Updated 6/9/2004 11:45 PM

Surveillance gets a satellite assist

By Richard Willing, USA TODAY

Just after Laci Peterson disappeared in Modesto, Calif., on Christmas Eve 2002, her husband, Scott, assured police that he had nothing to do with it.

But police were suspicious. Without Peterson's knowledge, they received court permission to attach global positioning system (GPS) tracking devices to the undersides of three vehicles he was known to drive. The devices, which use cell phone networks and signals from orbiting satellites to pinpoint land locations, indicated that twice in January 2003, Peterson drove to a San Francisco Bay marina near where the bodies of his .........

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Witness testifies that Peterson lied about golfing

Witness testifies that Peterson lied about golfing


Kemple

By JOHN COTÉ and GARTH STAPLEY

BEE STAFF WRITERS

Last Updated: June 10, 2004, 05:22:12 AM PDT

REDWOOD CITY -- Scott Peterson was more upset about burned barbecue chicken than he was about his wife's disappearance, an extended family member testified Wednesday during Peterson's double-murder trial. "I was so gol-darn mad because I saw more emotion out of him when he burnt the damn chicken than when his wife was missing," said Harvey Kemple, a construction worker married to a cousin of Laci Peterson's mother.

Kemple's testimony dominated a day in which the prosecution continued to cobble together a case against Peterson -- attempting to establish a timeline of what happened along the couple's quiet street on Dec. 24, 2002, and to highlight allegedly inconsistent statements Peterson made. ...........

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Burnt chicken testimony at Peterson trial

Stacy Finz and Diana Walsh, Chronicle Staff Writers

Scott Peterson seemed more upset about burning his chicken than he did about his wife's disappearance, said a fiery construction worker who had jurors and observers erupting into laughter during the second week of the capital-murder case today.

Peterson, 31, is on trial in Redwood City for allegedly murdering his pregnant wife, Laci, and their unborn child.

Harvey Kemple, a lifelong Modesto resident and Laci Peterson's cousin by marriage, told reporters outside the courthouse that while other family members stood by the defendant in the beginning, he was suspicious of the fertilizer salesman from the start.

Inside the courtroom, Kemple glared at the defendant while testifying. Peterson, dressed in a suit and tie, looked away.

"I saw more reaction out of.........

(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Extended News; Government; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events; US: California
KEYWORDS: avoidingchildsupport; baby; babyunborn; conner; deathpenaltytime; dontubelievemyalibi; drattedchicken; getarope; ibefishing; laci; lacipeterson; smallbaby; smallchild; sonkiller; unborn; wifekiller
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 251-257 next last
Wednesday: Scott Peterson's Trial events
1 posted on 06/10/2004 5:28:10 AM PDT by runningbear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Rheo; Mystery Y; Searching4Justice; brneyedgirl; Scupoli; sissyjane; TexKat; Lanza; Mrs.Liberty; ...
Pinging..........
I was glued to the Procession of Ronald Reagan yesterday.... back.. ;o)
2 posted on 06/10/2004 5:29:21 AM PDT by runningbear (Lurkers beware, Freeping is public opinions based on facts, theories, and news online.......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lanza; Mrs.Liberty; muggs; Reaganwuzthebest; csvset; Grampa Dave; alexandria; MaggieMay; ...
Pinging..........
I was glued to the Procession of Ronald Reagan yesterday.... back.. ;o)
3 posted on 06/10/2004 5:30:08 AM PDT by runningbear (Lurkers beware, Freeping is public opinions based on facts, theories, and news online.......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: runningbear; Tijeras_Slim
SCOTT BURNED IN RAGE


4 posted on 06/10/2004 5:49:43 AM PDT by Constitution Day
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Constitution Day

LOL..... oh yeah!!


5 posted on 06/10/2004 5:52:08 AM PDT by runningbear (Lurkers beware, Freeping is public opinions based on facts, theories, and news online.......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Constitution Day

Right on.


6 posted on 06/10/2004 6:21:37 AM PDT by MEG33 (John Kerry's been AWOL for two decades on issues of National Security)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: runningbear; Devil_Anse; Velveeta; Canadian Outrage; RGSpincich; All
I think I figured out why Geragroin was asking the Trader Joe's guy about the Challa bread...originally I thought he was just cutting up..But while questioning Amy he asked about the brunch Laci was to have on Christmas day. She was to serve french toast and MG asked Amy if Laci ever mentioned making it out of the Challa bread...
So from that I am thinking Geragroid is going to infer that Laci HAD intended to go shopping the morning of the 24th like Snott said...for the bread. But I can't see that she would be running out to the store ...why not ask her loving husband to run out for a few small items while she's busy getting ready, setting the table, cooking....
7 posted on 06/10/2004 6:32:56 AM PDT by Jackie-O
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Constitution Day
SCOTT BURNED IN RAGE

I'd rather he be hung in effigy... Effigy, Ohio.

8 posted on 06/10/2004 6:35:08 AM PDT by Tijeras_Slim (John Kerry - Not the Swiftest Boat in the Delta.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: runningbear
From the first story:

Maybe he was helping OJ find the real killer of his wife.
9 posted on 06/10/2004 6:39:46 AM PDT by Cultural Jihad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tijeras_Slim
Slim,

I sure hope no one's delicate little sensibilities get offended by that!
For the record, mine didn't.

CD

10 posted on 06/10/2004 6:49:38 AM PDT by Constitution Day (now just WHAT did I do with that tar-and-feathers image?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Cultural Jihad

I haven't golfed in a while. When I do, perhaps I'll just throw out the question: "Hey, any of you guys killed your wife lately?" just to see the reaction. These guys are giving golf a bad name.


11 posted on 06/10/2004 6:51:29 AM PDT by budwiesest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Cultural Jihad

Jihad! Dude! Your the last guy I thought I would ever be over here on the Peterson trial thread. ROTFL


12 posted on 06/10/2004 7:10:29 AM PDT by oceanperch (God Bless America!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Jackie-O

Hey, very astute of you, Jackie. Sounds very likely.

And what if she had been intending to go shopping on the 24th? The whole point is, no matter what she planned to do on the 24th, she never got the chance to do it.

I don't see where Scott could say/imply that it was on a grocery trip on the 24th that she was abducted. No--he's STUCK with the dog-walk story, b/c there is independent evidence that the dog was found loose with his leash on. Ha ha--that's your story, Scott, and now you've got to stick with it.


13 posted on 06/10/2004 7:16:29 AM PDT by Devil_Anse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Jackie-O

He's very stoic," Peterson told The Post.
"He starts thinking about how to solve things. He doesn't go to pieces."





LOL An older mman who gives him a tip on how not to char the chicken and he shines him on then loses it when he burns the chicken.

Yeah he is a real thinker. Keeps that temper in check.


If Laci's BBQ Guru cousin had these interesting tidbits about him never actually delivering flyers on two occasions and being a BBQ Loser I can't wait to hear the big stuff.

Scott your chicken butt is going to fry! Murderer!


14 posted on 06/10/2004 7:17:09 AM PDT by oceanperch (God Bless America!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Tijeras_Slim

I feel... faint. I fear my delicate sensibilities have been injured by viewing that picture of hanged effigies....ooohhhhhh......XX


15 posted on 06/10/2004 7:18:07 AM PDT by Devil_Anse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Cultural Jihad

...and in the latest news at this hour, OJ Simpson has found the killer of Scott Peterson's wife, and Scott Peterson has found the killer of OJ Simpson's wife.

The two men were seen traveling together in a golf cart on Interstate 10...


16 posted on 06/10/2004 7:19:49 AM PDT by Devil_Anse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Constitution Day

OW! OW!

Is there no end to the brutal crushing of my delicate sensibilities, dammitt??


17 posted on 06/10/2004 7:21:24 AM PDT by Devil_Anse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Devil_Anse

Nope, no end at all! :)


18 posted on 06/10/2004 7:23:04 AM PDT by Constitution Day
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Devil_Anse

I was simply thinking that MG is just trying to show some truth to some of Snott's lies...seems like he's grasping at straws to do that.


19 posted on 06/10/2004 7:36:54 AM PDT by Jackie-O
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: All

I was watching President Reagan's Funeral proceedings, so will try to catch up today!


20 posted on 06/10/2004 7:53:24 AM PDT by sissyjane (You're either with us or against us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Jackie-O

With MG's track record grasping at straws seems to be his talent.


21 posted on 06/10/2004 8:17:33 AM PDT by oceanperch (God Bless America!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Jackie-O
why not ask her loving husband to run out for a few small items while she's busy getting ready, setting the table, cooking....

You forgot walking the dog and mopping the floor...
22 posted on 06/10/2004 8:21:55 AM PDT by uncitizen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: runningbear
I think Scott is guilty, but...

The guy is comparing apples and oranges. If my wife (now ex-wife) disappeared, I would be stunned and shaken. My reaction would be nothing like it would be if I had just screwed up dinner. Not to mention the fact that Laci's family are not exactly impartial observers. Right now they are, quite understandably, looking for anything that might have been a sign of what Scott was going to do, or had done.

It's like when the neighbors say a murderer "kept to himself". The media always reports it because it implies he is a crazed loner, and grabs people's attention. But maybe he just doesn't like his neighbors. Maybe that neighbor is just mad that he didn't buy a candy bar from her kid during the last fund raiser.

I think the recollections of an investigating officer would be more telling.
23 posted on 06/10/2004 8:31:45 AM PDT by sharktrager (Reagan always wore his jacket when in the Oval Office. Clinton couldn't even keep his pants on.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sharktrager

I'm surprised that the judge even allowed the witnesses to testify as to their "suspiscions." Fact witnesses are supposed to testify to what they observed -- what they saw, heard, or physically felt -- not their suspiscions, which are nothing more than surmise and spectualation.


24 posted on 06/10/2004 8:40:25 AM PDT by Labyrinthos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Devil_Anse

Scotts problem solving alot like Charred Chicken.

He had to have forgotten about it on the grill... I'm trying to imagine that scene with his Chicken in flames. I wonder what problems he was solving at the time that took his attention away from the Grill. Probably one of his other Hens left a Chicken S*** message on one of his numerous problem solving cell phones.


25 posted on 06/10/2004 8:40:50 AM PDT by juzcuz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: uncitizen; Jackie-O
why not ask her loving husband to run out for a few small items while she's busy getting ready, setting the table, cooking...

...walking the dog and mopping the floor

... and sitting at her dressing table looking cute while arranging her hair... This woman must've been a skilled juggler...

26 posted on 06/10/2004 8:41:25 AM PDT by Devil_Anse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: oceanperch

In January, 2003, I remember that we heard something like, the police said "If you knew what we knew, you'd understand why we keep going back to the Bay." Something like that.

Well, what they knew was: Scott kept inexplicably driving to the Bay. And he was attempting to do it secretly. Rather than (as Geragos says) Scott's having driven to the Bay b/c the police were going there, I think a large part of the time, the police were continuing to dive in the Bay b/c they saw that Scott kept going there.


27 posted on 06/10/2004 8:52:30 AM PDT by Devil_Anse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Devil_Anse

Was she fixing her hair before going to mop the floor?


28 posted on 06/10/2004 8:55:05 AM PDT by uncitizen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: juzcuz

LOL! Imagine his thought processes... "Okay, that one that just rang, that's my Friday cellphone... let's see... that's the one that I take my calls from Georgette on... now what story did I give Georgette? Gotta think..."


29 posted on 06/10/2004 8:55:09 AM PDT by Devil_Anse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Labyrinthos

It's permissible for a witness to speak of his own state of mind.


30 posted on 06/10/2004 9:01:27 AM PDT by Devil_Anse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Devil_Anse

LOLOTFL


31 posted on 06/10/2004 9:01:57 AM PDT by juzcuz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Devil_Anse

I think he's probably guilty; however, the story of Scott at the bay was out from the begining and the media coverage was non-stop. If someone else had kidnapped Laci and was going to kill her at a later date, what better location to dump the body then in the bay where the husband said he was on the day of her disappearance. Afterall, the husband is always the first suspect in these cases.


32 posted on 06/10/2004 9:03:53 AM PDT by X-Servative (Surviving in CA...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: sharktrager

If you think Laci's family are not exactly impartial observers, wait till Scott's family members start testifying.


33 posted on 06/10/2004 9:04:35 AM PDT by Devil_Anse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: X-Servative

The story that Scott had SAID he spent "the day" fishing in the Bay was out, yes. But nobody, and I mean nobody, knew what time the parking ticket for the marina had stamped on it. Nobody who talked about this case could do anything but go on what Scott said: "Okay, he says he left home at 9:30, so he must've gotten to Berkeley about 11:00..."

That was all the public had. Furthermore, there were doubts raised from the beginning--sometimes it appeared that most people doubted he had really gone to the Bay at all. It was by no means an accepted fact that he had even gone to the Bay.

And if the "story of Scott at the bay" was constantly being told, that works both ways: since the alleged involvement of the Bay was well-known, you can bet that if anyone had done anything suspicious in the ensuing days, such as dump a body, at the Bay, SOMEONE would have noticed.


34 posted on 06/10/2004 9:09:56 AM PDT by Devil_Anse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Devil_Anse
I agree. But no reporters will try to paint their observations as if they are impartial observations.

This type of story is just the media hyping a story because of the prurient interest of the public.

Heck, the only reason I even opened the thread was because the headline was a prime example of how the press and the courts are taking observations that make no sense at all and acting as if they are valuable information.
35 posted on 06/10/2004 9:18:04 AM PDT by sharktrager (Reagan always wore his jacket when in the Oval Office. Clinton couldn't even keep his pants on.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Devil_Anse

Hah! Scotty led LEO all the way.
Dumb jerk.


36 posted on 06/10/2004 9:22:10 AM PDT by oceanperch (God Bless America!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Devil_Anse
It's permissible for a witness to speak of his own state of mind.

That's not state of mind testimony. For example, "I was angry," "I was sad," "I felt humiliated," all refer to the witnesses' state of mind. "The defendant acted suspisciouly" is nothing more than a speculative conclusion based upon other facts. The witness should testify as to what he or she observed and let the prosecutor argue to the jury that the defendant's conduct was suspiscious.

37 posted on 06/10/2004 9:52:50 AM PDT by Labyrinthos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Devil_Anse; X-Servative
That bay was under the media microscope, and probably the immediate community, since the very beginning...not to mention that it was many times crawling with LE.
( And Snotty himself was out there lurking around numerous times afterwards too,) I doubt that the "real killers" would have risked being noticed hauling a heavily weighted pregnant persons body to dump their in an elaborate scheme to frame Snotty. An unbelievable scenario, IMO.
And like you said Dev...the public was not privy to timetables, details much like that.
38 posted on 06/10/2004 10:35:20 AM PDT by Jackie-O
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: runningbear

Even so...it seems like her family and friends are out to get him no matter even...even from the beginning sometimes it seemed to be the case.


39 posted on 06/10/2004 10:38:19 AM PDT by Liberatio (Please forgive my misspelling. Veritas Vos Liberabit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Liberatio
Laci's family has been tight lipped up until the trial..the few times they had interviews, they were very careful not to speak against SP, IMO to protect the integrity of the case. They are under oath for testimony, I doubt they would lie knowing that a conviction would send their son-in-law to Death Row. They have never given me the impression that they are out for his blood, at any cost.
When they leave the courtroom every day, they make limited, if any comments, and do so in a dignified manner.
Scott's family is the other side of the spectrum.
40 posted on 06/10/2004 11:13:37 AM PDT by Jackie-O
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Labyrinthos

Saying that he felt suspicious is a statement of one's state of mind.

What year did you get your law degree? Mine: 1984.

As far as I know, Geragos and his cohort Harris also have law degrees.

Perhaps you are ill-informed because you have not read the actual transcripts, or excerpts from them. I would suggest that you buy the relevant pages, highlight in yellow the parts where you think Geragos did not adequately safeguard his client's interests from testimony YOU think shouldn't be admitted, and send it to him with a note. You might also want to send a note to the judge, reminding him of his dereliction of duty.

A lay witness can testify that, to him, Scott acted suspiciously.

Contrary to popular belief, lay witnesses can sometimes testify as to their opinions--or, as you expressed it, to "conclusions" made by them. [You said they were "speculative" conclusions, but they weren't speculative, b/c the conclusions of the witnesses were reached after actually seeing and being there.)

While California has its own evidence code, the fact is that the rules of evidence for each state have more similarities than differences. Because of that, the following passage, which is NOT from California, but is from another state, is applicable:

"[C]ourts historically have recognized a number of subjects about which a lay witness is permitted routinely to offer an opinion because such opinions are a shorthand rendition of the facts upon which they are based."

Lest you think that the witnesses are usurping the jury's role as the sole 12 people who are to decide if Scott is guilty, let me point out that for a witness to say (in essence) that Scott acted suspiciously, is for him to give proof of a fact that, if true, TENDS towards the ultimate conclusion that Scott is guilty. Obviously, that ultimate conclusion is for the jury to reach/not reach. But whether he acted in a certain way is highly relevant, probative of facts which are material, and it is permissible for a lay witness to describe his/her experience of how Scott was acting.


41 posted on 06/10/2004 11:13:47 AM PDT by Devil_Anse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Liberatio

NO, Don't think so!! He gave them plenty to question!!


42 posted on 06/10/2004 11:15:27 AM PDT by Canadian Outrage (IAll us Western Canuks belong South!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Liberatio

Where have you been? Laci's family couldn't sing Scott's praises enough in the early days of this case. They obviously didn't want to believe that he was a murderer. If they now believe that, it is only after seeing fact after fact pointing in one direction: to Scott.

Are you truly interested in this case, or are you just part of the little club of idle people who get a false sense of superiority out of dabbling in these threads (in between going to the sports threads)?


43 posted on 06/10/2004 11:17:45 AM PDT by Devil_Anse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Devil_Anse

What was in the package that the mail guy saw in Scotts mail box. -Poll-

1.) Wine of the Month
2.) Viagra Refills
3.) Burnt Chicken
4.) Amber Pics


44 posted on 06/10/2004 11:35:22 AM PDT by juzcuz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: juzcuz

LOL!!


45 posted on 06/10/2004 11:45:47 AM PDT by Canadian Outrage (IAll us Western Canuks belong South!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: juzcuz

ROFL!!!

I think it was "Viagra of the Month".


46 posted on 06/10/2004 11:51:03 AM PDT by Devil_Anse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Devil_Anse

Actually

I think this case and her murder was all about money.


47 posted on 06/10/2004 12:05:01 PM PDT by juzcuz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: juzcuz

I think it had a LOT to do with it also. IF Scott ONLY wanted to be free, he could have filed for Divorce as millions of folks do every year. He's greedy, He's, self-centered, he didn't want to pay child support or alimony. And it is conceivable that on the other side of the coin, that WHEN Laci received her inheritance SHE would have NO dependence upon him at all. I don't think he would like that as Laci's father says he was WAAAAAAAY too controlling of Laci!! btw. I just read on WS that a Talking Head on Fox just said that the Prosecution has pretty CLOSED the time line. IMO that leaves Geragos without ANY credible Defense.


48 posted on 06/10/2004 12:14:47 PM PDT by Canadian Outrage (IAll us Western Canuks belong South!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Devil_Anse

Listen to this Dev: The Medinas Left their home across the street from Petersons (to go away for two days) at 10:30am on Dec. 24th, Karen Servas returned MacKenzie to Peterson's yard at 10:18 Dec. 24th and the mailman delivered a package to Petersons at 10:38 on December 24th as well as being on the street during that time period. WHERE is the time for ANYBODY to abduct LACI????? The DEFENSE are as BOXED IN as they can be.


49 posted on 06/10/2004 12:26:05 PM PDT by Canadian Outrage (IAll us Western Canuks belong South!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Canadian Outrage

I keep thinking about the Martha Stewart Meringue Show. Do you think it is possible that Distaso knew all along that Martha discussed egg whites at approx 9:40 on 12-24 and was HOPING that Geragross would arrogantly use this "misstep" by the prosecution in order to box Scott's time frame in--whew!!


50 posted on 06/10/2004 12:41:47 PM PDT by kmiller1k (remain calm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 251-257 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson