Laci Peterson- Husband Still Not Ruled Out

The Modesto Bee ^ | 01-09-2003 | TY PHILLIPS

[landerwy]

Officers aboard a San Mateo County Sheriff's Department search and rescue boat check underwater.

THE ASSOCIATED PRESS A law enforcement official collects a water sample from the Berkeley Marina on Wednesday while searching for Laci Peterson.

By TY PHILLIPS BEE STAFF WRITER Searchers returned to the Berkeley Marina on Wednesday and used underwater camera equipment to hunt for clues relating to the disappearance of Laci Peterson of Modesto.

[ken5050]

Why doesn't the article mention that the husband has several times refused to take a lie detector test.....

[landerwy]

ping

[RGSpincich]

Due date February 10, 2003.

According to the linked article and others Laci was expecting the baby in a month and a half on December 24th. She was not in that critical period just two weeks prior to delivery.

[OldFriend]

Why don't the authorities simply say they have no idea.......which is the truth. Until they do, what is the point in these meaningless comments. Or are they looking for a white van.

[landerwy]

i only posted! I don't write the articles! But you both bring out good points!

[ken5050]

I wasn't criticizing you....but it's a glaring omission, IMHO....the spouse and close family are always looked at first, and closely, and in many cases where there isn't an iron-clad alibi, they are asked to take a lie-detector test.....because it can help police ELIMINATE them as suspects, and thus devote resouces to more productive areas of investigation....only guilty spouses refuse.....he did it...

[Russ]

You are soooo right!

[ken5050]

Have you seen anything about his background.....bio....

[bigj00]

So,according to the media, this guy is guilty of murder because he went fishing and nobody recalls seeing him.

I go mountain bike riding and if I see 3 people its a busy, crowded trail. (and I wouldn't be able to tell you what they look like, either.)

Would I be guilty if something happened to my girlfriend while I was out riding???

[TopDog2]

only guilty spouses refuse.....he did it...

Puh-lese! I'd never take one under these circumstances either. His wife is missing, he's upset. A question such as, "Did you murder your wife?" would likely cause a polygraph test to register distress when he truthfully answered, "No."

The polygraph is notoriously unreliable as well which is why the results of these "tests" are not admissable as eveidence in court. He may indeed be guilty, but to suggest that he is guilty solely on his refusal to take a polygraph test is, imho, totally wrong.

[rolling_stone]

Lie detector test is a misnomer and about as reliable as tea leaves...

http://antipolygraph.org/

[texasbluebell]

I was wondering about that. Here's something interesting that Mark Fuhrman said last night on Greta:

That the police wouldn't be searching in the marina unless the husband had either failed or refused to take a polygraph test...

[crystalk]

Stupid lie detector test, pseudo-science, it only reflects the prejudices of the person who asks the questions, or designs them, ...and the degree to which they can lean on a flustered innocent who is not a polished habitual liar!

x42 might well have PASSED one, about Monica or whoever!

No way would I ever agree to take one if I were someone whom LE was singling out, trying to hammer. Only if I were one of a hundred people being asked to take them as a general screen, with same questions and examiner, would I agree to this...

[Marysecretary]

I agree, bigj00. We all do things that could be suspicious. I figured if he was out the day before Christmas, perhaps nobody did see him. We seem to forget innocence until proven guilty. If he's guilty, so be it, but if he isn't, well, we should be ashamed of ourselves to point the finger and pronounce him guilty.

[ken5050]

I understand that the LD aren't always reliable, but we're NOt trying to prove guilt here, but that he's innocent...look, he's a suspect..it's a given...it's standard police policy, borne out by the statistics...so even if he's innocent, but the LD is questionable...he's no worse off thjan before.....I submit to both of you..if your spouse, or child, was missing, and you had nothing to do with it, and the cops asked you to take a LD to eliminate you.....and help them...you'd refuse?...I don't blieve you would..

[OldFriend]

Or they have no clues at all and are simply doing the obvious to make it look like they have something.

[Quilla]

My husband (an avid fisherman) and I were discussing this case this morning. He's only caught a few of the high spots of the story on the evening news. The first thing he asked me was "Did he catch any fish?" His right eyebrow shot up! Could y'all tell me how long Peterson was fishing that day? Doesn't it seem odd that an experienced angler didn't catch a thing.

[Monti Cello]

Watching a local Bay Area news broadcast this morning, the story was 'why won't this guy sit down for an interview with us?'.

They apparently tried to convince him that such an interview would help him to clear himself. The response quoted was that the husband stated that it would be 'a waste of time'.

I certainly can understand a serious distrust of the media. Based on the pictures alone...a large husband with an alibi that doesn't really exonerate him 100% and attractive pregnant wife. Anything short of a convincing public weep-fest by the guy will be used against him by the media's morality show. He may be exacerbating his problems if the press turns against him, as may already be occurring with these stories this morning.

The guy should at least get a professional to help with his PR on his own terms.