Posted on 08/25/2004 5:25:50 AM PDT by runningbear
The whole general tone of the conversation btwn Scott and Janey was unreal. Like nothing was unusual in their lives. Jovial. Small talk. Talking about "let's go to the beach". what the?
Scott wanted to sell his house furnished, which is the main reason Laci's family went there to "retrieve" some of her furniture, while LE turned their backs and the Peterson's went ballistic.
Scott was so rotten, he couldn't even GIVE them a thing that belonged to Laci. He's evil.
Thanks, spectre!!!!
Naw, now they say it was not true about JP crying. The whole family is whacked! She won't get it, she is the tree, Scott is the apple that didn't fall far from it!
I haven't notice that "senority" counts here at FR.
Yeah, real special!! The whole family is WHACKED!
DA, you don't want to see it, unless you like blood, gore & having the bejeebers scared out of you & nitemares to boot!! I had to stop watching it half way thru, it was horrible, something that SP would definitely enjoy, probably as much as being a murderer himself!!
Well, now you're starting to make sense!!!
One observation. I have never heard a single person who seriously disparages shrinks who has not had some, um, shall we say, personal experience with one.
You are a very wise poster.
Those are both good theories. As another, I can't escape thoughts that Scott just hated Laci, hated her things, and was surreptitiously taking another hit at her by eliminating things he knew she had held dear. Sort of like spitting on someone's grave.
Scott seems to express his anger in roundabout ways--never directly, it seems.
Okay, maybe I'll stick with "Angel Heart".
It's about this guy who lies all the time, see, and does bad things, and he doesn't realize that his soul has already been lost and that the devil is just waiting around for the right time to take it...
Come to think of it, it's sort of like Scott's story!
Here's someone who has obviously attended the Bill Clinton school of rhetoric.
Interesting that, instead of attempting to refute my point, you simply engaged in a personal attack. You're sounding almost as evasive as Scott Peterson. (That's the defendant in the case which is the thread topic, in case you failed to notice that while you were busy pretending to be well-educated.)
Ha ha ha! That's rich! You've got my psych dossier all ready to go and impugn my sanity, then when I point it out, claim that you're being personally attacked. It's Bill Clinton, Sid Blumenthal and James Carville all rolled into one!
Methinks you do protest too much. So, your sanity is subject to being impugned?
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.