Rumors leave lives in limbo (And her husband isn't a suspect)and risks of premature judgment

sacbee ^ | 1/25/2003 | M.S. Enkoji

[TLBSHOW]

Rumors leave lives in limbo Experts say Peterson case shows risks of premature judgment.

In the search for a missing Modesto woman, about the only thing police will say publicly is that her disappearance on Christmas Eve is suspicious and they suspect foul play. And her husband isn't a suspect. Yet Scott Peterson, a 30-year-old fertilizer salesman, finds himself immersed in a swirl of suspicion that began soon after the day he said he last saw his pregnant wife, 27-year-old Laci Peterson.

[TLBSHOW]

bttt

[KneelBeforeZod]

I think most people will rate how bad someone is for cheating based on their position...ie cop vs. cashier, doctor vs. doorman...

[KneelBeforeZod]

You'll have something to add when Ann Coulter writes a column about it and then you'll know what you think.

best post all week

[KneelBeforeZod]

"I eat fertilizer"

Results 1 - 10 of about 96,900. Search took 0.14 seconds.

[TLBSHOW]

sorry to hear that! I Hope all is well with you.

[tubebender]

When Carol Sund and her daughter and friend Silvina Pelosso disappeared from near Yosemite the LEOs were so sure one person could not do in three women that they overlooked a prime suspect.. When Carols wallet turned up in MODESTO they homed in on a motorcycle gang and arrested some of them. Only after Cary Stayner killed again in Yosemite and confessed to the Sund-Pelosso murders and led LEOs to Julies body was the real killer arrested. Cary Stayner was the handyman at the motel where the women disappeared.

[tahiti]

"When free speech reduces privacy, the "conflict" should be resolved in favor of the enumerated right (our very first one)."

First, there is no "hiarchey" of rights. The 9th amendment is on no less equal footing as the 1st amendment because of its place is sometype of numerical order.

Second, "when free speech reduces privacy,..." the "confict" is resolved not in favor of enumerated right, but resolved by the unenumerated right that free speech must be truthful, otherwise the origin of the free speech is subject to libel and slander.

[Odile]

THANK YOU so much for this WONDERFUL post. I have thought EXACTLY the same thing for many MANY years.

The McMartin case was one of the prime events that made me forever suspicious of the agenda-driven media, who want to discredit private enterprise, weaken the American family, destroy privacy and promote ever greater -- and tighter -- STATE CONTROL of domestic affairs.

As I said in an earlier post:

VENGEANCE belongs to God. WE ought to be more in the business of binding up wounds and healing the broken lives of those often fatally damaged by the fallout from a crime. The innocent husbands, wives and CHILDREN of perpetrators ought not to be left to suffer cruelly for the crime of someone on whom they were dependent.

Our priorities are all wrong.

[Odile]

What a gruesome imagination!

If you are right, however, WHAT HAPPENED TO THE BODY?

[Odile]

Cheer up. Sticks and stones may break my bones, but name-calling in cyberspace will never harm me.

[Odile]

What an extreme reaction to the use of a perfectly good English word!

In countless books, plays, movies and articles, police and law enforcement agencies such as the FBI or Scotland Yard are referred to as "the authorities."

The word has different shades of meaning. The late Milton Cross was considered an authority on Opera. The late Marchette Chute was an authority on Shakespeare. Albert Einstein and Edward Teller were authorities on Mathematics and Nuclear Physics. Bill Gates is an authority in the fields of Computer Science and Market Manipulation. Jesse Jackson an authority on Hypocrisy. Madonna an authority on Hype.

Obviously, anyone given the power (authority) to arrest and detain private citizens for interrogation and possible incarceration must be considered an "authority," since he is granted awesome powers by the State in order to do his job.

A judge is also considered an authority. "By the power vested in me, I now pronounce you Husband and Wife."

Words have specific meanings to be sure, but they also have MULTIPLE meanings in many instances.

[Odile]

//free speech must be truthful, otherwise the origin of the free speech is subject to libel and slander.\\

Not for anyone in PUBLIC life. All public figures are fair game.

Old Walter Winchell was ALWAYS being hauled into court to defend himself in countless libel, slander and defamation of character suits. He made a CAREER out of it, and no one was ever able to stop his malicious mischief.

Even when a private citizen is ABLE to bring suit, he HAS to PROVE malicious INTENT in the part of a publication or accuser. Evidently, from the abundant health and strength of the scandal mongering business, that is a very difficult thing to do.

What we suffer from most today is the death of both common sense and what-used-to-be-known-as good taste.

[Wolfstar]

Speaking as someone whose entire adult life has been spent in public communications, I wish with all my heart that the general public would come to understand just how mendacious and double-dealing the news media can be.

Even when they report what is called hard news — just the facts of where, what, when, how, who — they get details wrong more frequently than people realize. Yet hard news is considerably more reliable that soft news, which is all the filler, background, polls, and opinion stuff. Particularly on TV news (both cable and the national and local broadcasts), content consists of perhaps 5% hard news and 95% filler.

Yet most people consume the filler uncritically, as though it were factual, when the bulk of it is agenda-driven opinion and spin. Hidden agendas do not always have to be political, by the way. The overriding agenda of all purveyors of news product, whether print or broadcast, is to beat the competition and make money. In today's heavily niche-oriented market, some skew Left, some skew Right, some skew toward low-brow gossip, others toward high-brow "information," and so on.

Purveyors of news product are no different from purveyors of other types of product, except in one crucial way. They are the filter through which the general public is informed (well or poorly; mostly poorly) of public policy issues. It is largely the broadcast news media that:

• Has framed politics as a kind of sport,
• Props up our so-called "two-party" system, even though political parties are private entities having nothing to do with government except insofar as they sponsor candidates for public office,
• Actively backs political agendas rather than remaining strictly neutral, although they promote themselves as "objective,"
• Decides what is and is not newsworthy,
• Actively lies, misrepresents, withholds critical facts, and otherwise misleads the public when it suits the media's purposes.

This is why, whenever I have the opportunity, I caution people to be highly skeptical of ANYTHING in the news other than hard facts. Make your own judgments based on multiple corroborative sources of information. And even then, give a story time to unfold fully before jumping to the conclusion the media seems intent on making you draw.

[mommadooo3]

IF this 'gf' of SP was something he was serious about, then WHY did he come up with the lie about being out of town/country for Christmas? He obviously, had 'some' plans to be with wife/child-to-be for the holidays. And if his intentions were to kill them, then he would have NO reason to lie about being out of town/country for Christmas, in dealing with the 'gf'.

I'm NOT defending this guy, but it seems that a lot of folks are willing to jump on a 'lynch mob' simply because he does not act/react like THEY would...or like THEY think he SHOULD.

There's not a whole lot about this 'case' that makes sense. For every point made about SP's guilt, there is a 'counter-point' that can be made. But .........

[muggs]

Hi momma, he could have accidently killed her in a rage on the 23rd or early on the 24th. Maybe he planned to be with his wife and her family on Christmas eve so he had to have a reason he couldn't be with his g/f, thus the story about being out of town.

I'll pretend for a minute that I don't think he killed Laci and the baby. He comes home from fishing and they are missing, supposing he hates Laci, you would still think he would be concerned because of his unborn son. But yet he is still calling his g/f several times (she taped the calls for the police).

[muggs]

Forgot, I don't think he was real serious about the g/f but I think he may have led her to believe he was.

[mommadooo3]

Like I said, I'm NOT defending this guy. But there are soooo many things that 'look obvious' that could have 'explanations'. (it's one of those 'been there, done that' situations I speak from) [but no one in my situation has turned up dead/missing]

The idea that SP has been photographed smiling during a 'vigil' for his wife seems to be an 'automatic' he's guilty/'a dirt-bag' pronouncement. However, if he's taking that 'prozac' type stuff, NOTHING will be able to depress him. IF he was smiling because he thought he was getting away with a 'lost wife/child', (thanks to him), then WHY is there a wedding ring on his hand? Whether they're killers or not, the FIRST thing to 'disappear' is that ring that ADVERTISES their 'availability'. (Someone needs to take that ring off and see what's under it. Is there a 'tan line' to give anything away?)

And..... as someone who works with the public, how OFTEN does your 'public' SEE that you're having 'trouble' in your private life? Do you drag 'your' problems to 'your' public dealings, or have 'you' learned how to find that 'line'? (as a 'barmaid' since 16, I have NO difficulty finding that 'line')

And with that photo, is that the ONLY one taken that night, or is it the only one that 'backs up' the public perception of what/who he is/should be?

Yes, he was 'fishing' on Christmas Eve DAY. My hubby has been 'working' on Christmas Eve day. Hubby has ALSO been 'working' on the SAME night as the birth of TWO of our kids. I had to go and drive MYSELF, being in labor, to his place of 'employment'. Does that make him guilty of 'something'??? Does that mean he's a dirt-bag because he 'should have known better'??? NO Lady... it made him listed on the BC as 'attending physician'. But there ARE some, who have called him everything but a white boy, because of how things worked out. It ALL depended on what 'those' people thought was 'proper and upright'.

AGAIN, I'm not defending this SP...and neither am I condemning him. I just don't believe 'we' have received enough info to make a 'fair/impartial' decision either way.

[TLBSHOW]

BUMP

[TLBSHOW]

Like I said its just a story! And time will tell. Another thought of course is he doesn't THINK he is a suspect and he will screw up.


6 posted on 01/25/2003 2:04 PM EST by TLBSHOW

Police: Peterson Was Suspect From Start
Police: Scott Peterson Was Always Suspected in December Disappearance of His Wife, Unborn Child
http://abcnews.go.com/wire/US/ap20030419_1016.html

BINGO............

[TLBSHOW]

He murdered her, put her body in the boat, took it somewhere and dumped it. That's how you make someone disappear, until they are found, if ever.


BUMP