Haggling Over Evidence in Peterson Trial

The Guardian ^ | 3/01/2004 | Brian Skoloff

[Devil_Anse]

I can see her not wanting to testify if it's an any-minute situation as to her going into labor. I bet she's worried her water will break while she's in the courtroom... I can understand that. But, sheesh, she's supposed to be so healthy... didn't she used to be a health club or yoga instructor? If I could try cases right up to the time of delivery, why couldn't she testify? Plus, I think it would be advantageous to HER--the defense wouldn't DARE be nasty while cross-examining a very pregnant woman!

It never ceases to amaze me how some people, when they are expecting a baby, think that motherhood has never happened on this earth before, that it's never happened till THEY did it! Amber should know better... she already has had a baby.

They'll get her testimony in at some point. And they can play the tapes of the phone conversations, as well as those interviews Scott did, any time during their presentation.

I can't believe the article said that about her hair! The press really is merciless!

[Devil_Anse]

Now that's more like it!! Go Amber!!

[Devil_Anse]

I don't know about the men on the panel, but if any woman on the panel says she has absolutely no opinion regarding extramarital affairs, IMO she's lying.

[Jackie-O]

Allred said the only thing Amber is apprehensive about is being so far away from home and her OB if she is due any day at the time she is to testify. I'm sure they will work around it.

[Devil_Anse]

That guy looks like he'll never confess, but from what I understand, they still have some powerful evidence against him.

It is so sad--and must be unbearable for her family--to think of that poor girl's remains still out there somewhere, lost and unseen...

[Jackie-O]

Thanks for reminding me...I need to watch this case today to see if there is any news.

[Devil_Anse]

That Fox legal guy, Stan Goldman, was pointing out last night how they don't HAVE to even have Amber testify. They've already got the tapes, they can get the tapes in w/o her. (Ahem, I used to point this out over and over and over, to a certain doubting poster.)

Furthermore, as to Scott and Amber having partied together, there were others present at those times, and those others could testify, and place Scott and Amber together. AND there are of course those sickening photos of Scott and Amber. I think the Santa photo will be particularly nauseating to the jurors. Not to mention the identical poses Scott struck, with Laci, and then with Amber, by the Christmas tree.

However, as other talking heads pointed out, tactically speaking, it is far better to physically bring Amber into the courtroom. The jurors will be better able to keep the affair in mind if they do that.

[Jackie-O]

Here's where I'll be with news on Dru, and Rodrequez's hearing today.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/1089231/posts?page=5

[Devil_Anse]

Thanks!!

[Lucy Lake]

Bookmark.

[Sandylapper]

Thanks Jackie and Howlin for the link and new thread. I'll be following along for news while jury is being selected.

[Jackie-O]

Hey sandy..where ya been?

[Canadian Outrage]

Dev: Gloria Allred said on CTV yesterday that Amber WILL do her duty and testify!! Of course, she doesn't really want to, who would? She understands her relevance here.

[Canadian Outrage]

I just have to type you what was posted on CTV this afternoon. It is extremely interesting and excitingly revealing to me. It goes as follows: Heading: FINGERPRINTS? HANDWRITING ANALYSIS: Oceaanblueeys read the 23 pages of the Jury Questionnaire. She has served on two murder juries in the past and finds this revealing:
She quotes: " What I found interesting is the questioning if they knew anyone that was in a particular SPECIALIZED TRAINING. tHE LIST WAS QUITE TELLING in her opinion. Five of the types of specialized training caused her to pause. I quote: "I believe that it gives us a glimpse of who will be testifying in this trial. I will list them again... please add others that you think may be significant.
1. Banking/Finance.. Are we going to see a repeat of the MP financial downfall? 2. Drugs/Alcohol... Did they find traaaceable drugs in Laci's body after all? Or are they going to testify of SP's dealings with drugs? Maybe both? 3. Firearms.... Is there another firearm that we are not aware of? Does the hand gun SP had in the truck hold a secret? 4. Handwriting Analysis... Why is a handwriting expert being called? Are there forged documents in this case? Is this the insurance policy? Or other documents such as fraud committed by SP? 5. Fingerprints?...Whose fingerprints? Where? On tape perhaps? On the recently cleaned window in Laci's home or on the window sill? Could the fingerprint be left in some type of DNA of Laci? I had thought these things are very interesting and like a mini-road map of who may testify.

Another poster wrote: The handwriting analysis may be about the note Scott wrote and put up at the Search Centre, or about the fake ID and stuff that was used to buy the car under the *Boy named Sue*, Maybe they found the gun was recently fired in that truck and Scott lied?

Then another poster wrote Graphoanalysts, like this one, are legit. http://www.ancestry.com/library/view/ancmag/1595.asp. I didn't check the site but it goes on to say: Maybe the handwwriting analysis has something to do with Scott's character also. An experienced Graphologisst is supposed to be able to make certain assumptions about the subject's personality through the size, shape of letters, legibility, etc. of their writing. Wondering if there is more to the insurance,such as an increasee in coverage that Laci herself did not endorse? The possibilities are numerous.

Lastly, another poster surmises that perhaps LE found a threatening note to Laci? The interesting thing is the fingerprint expert. Is there indeed Scott's fingerprints that have been lifted from the duct tape used to tape Laci "together"? In any event, there are a number of EXPERTS in the above noted fields, listed to testify!!

Sorry for the length of this but I think it is extremely revealing. The Prosecution has done an exemplery job of "hiding the ball" on a number of absolutely KEY issues!! What do the rest of you think? CO

[Canadian Outrage]

VElVEETA!! I meant it for you also! Sorry gal.

[onyx]

Very interesting and your penned us a thorough report. Several 'thangs' to consider and ponder. Thanks CO.

[Canadian Outrage]

your welcome onyx!! Where are the rest of our crew?? They have ALL been absent since this morning!!

[onyx]

Busy I reckon. I've been in and out all day, and the 4-year-old just now headed for bed. MY time at last.

[Canadian Outrage]

Also onyx, How many times have we heard there is "NO EVIDENCE" yet, if ou go and look at the questionnaire, eveery expert that you normally see in a rock solid csse is listed there (their specialized fields andeven some we usually don't see). A fingerprint expert could turn this case on its head. I can't get that one out of my mind. What fingerprints will he be showing to the Jury? This above post was re-printed from Oceanblueeyes who posted the original questions in the first place. She is also the one who has served on 2 (TWO) Murder cases.

[Canadian Outrage]

Isn't baby/toddler bedtime just the best time of day? LOL. Although our litle ones tire us out, it's heaven to tuck them into bed.!! I wish Laci were tucking her little one Connor into bed. What a "needless" tragedy!!