[Sandylapper]

This is the part I would have the most problem with if I were a juror. A normal, logical person on a jury is going to think "the guy had a truck and a boat, he was the last known person to see her alive, he goes fishing in a bay 90 miles away, her partial body (and that of her baby) is found 4 months later in that same bay, taped with HIS finger prints on the tape"--no brainer here, jury, do your duty. Why does it really matter whether her body was in the boat or the truck? Okay, just a little loose end prosecution wants to nail down. Could stuff like this be the reason why CA has the largest state budget deficit in the nation, including all the other states combined?

FWIW, I don't think they have a fingerprint. JMO

[Velveeta]

But! There's going to be that ONE OJ juror who's going to say: "Where's the proof that SP used the boat to dump her in the bay?" "There's no proof and he couldn't have driven his truck into the bay....so he couldn't have done it cause there just isn't any proof as to HOW".

The DA has to prove:

Who = SP
What = Smothered Laci with pillow
Where = Covena -> Warehouse -> Bay
When = After 8:30pm Dec. 23rd
How = killed her, wrapped her up, taped her up, drove in truck to warehouse, loaded into boat, motored out to bay, dumped her with weights on, drove back to warehouse, back home, showered....etc
Why = Amber

[Devil_Anse]

Okay, Scott walks.

I am just thinking, though... one thing that has bothered me all along is something that will not be presented by the state as an argument that Scott did it. But in spite of that, it is something that in MY mind makes ME think Scott did it: the question I have for you is (and yes, I know this has no place in a courtroom), if Scott didn't kill her, who did, and above all, WHY?