Posted on 06/30/2004 5:34:17 AM PDT by runningbear
Suppose Geragos can somehow convince the judge that this really was misconduct on the part of Brocchini? What else could the judge do, then, except declare a mistrial? And where would a mistrial leave Scott? No better off than he was--and maybe worse off.
If a mistrial were granted, the prosecution would be able to try him again. The only thing that can prevent that would be a valid claim of double jeopardy. And this ain't it!
Good point and I'm sure Geragos has this all figured out too. Tuesday is going to be interesting to see where he goes with it.
Very well said, juzcuz.
In a post-Clinton world, Scott's just telling it like it is--honestly, instead of with obvious lies--is just really hard for some to understand.
In my opinion, the tip was considered to NOT be credible, because it was phoned in AFTER the bodies were discovered. Now if the tip was recieved before the discovery of the bodies, it would have been considered in a completely different light.
Can't the judge tell the jury to disregard it?
....but can't the jury also --in the jury instructions be told that if they find that a witness has lied in one instance, that the jury can then disregard all of that witnesses testimony??
It's NOT me!!! :)
Yes, we can sit around and marvel at his rotten luck. Or we can do another fun mental exercise: we can imagine that Laci was actually killed by someone else.
I try to do that sometimes. Okay, when could it have occurred? 1. During the 10 minutes when it was possible that she was walking her dog.
I doubt that.
2. Some time between 10:08 (when her stalwart protector-husband left her side) and 4:45 (when said protector returned.)
Let's see. Laci, at home that day... not a single person she knew spoke to her or heard from her, though more than one tried to call her, on more than one phone. Oh! I know! It happened when Laci was NOT at home! It must've happened when she went out somewhere in her car!
Uh-oh. How could it have happened that way? How would her car have returned back to its exact same position in her driveway, all safe and sound?
Okay, so what we have left is that some OTHER PERSON(S) took Laci, but Laci must have been near or in her home, b/c her car never left home.
So that means some time during the BROAD DAYLIGHT, someone boldly walked up to Laci, who was on foot, dog-less, and near her home, and just took her. No screams, no screeching tires, no threatening yells, no blood from a struggle, no dropped personal property (such as purse, keys, or cellphone), no drag marks on the ground, no ransom calls, no mess in her house, no dead body left lying in a ditch, no USE OF HER CREDIT OR BANK CARDS, and NOT A SINGLE WITNESS TO EVEN THE SLIGHTEST BIT OF THIS BIG ABDUCTION, which must SURELY have been at least a little violent or loud--given that Laci, as Mr. Geragos was at pains to point out, was a "spitfire".
Even Dru Sjodin left a SHOE and a CELLPHONE.
Oh, and these evil persons are still out there. They had such success in that extremely dangerous Covena Ave. neighborhood, you'd think they'd have come back since Dec. 2002 and gotten some other women, too. Strangely, they haven't.
For those who believe the stranger came into the home to get her, please tell me why the stranger left diamond jewelry and a loaded purse behind. Don't tell me it was b/c the stranger was a sex criminal, not a money criminal: we all know that rapists take their victims' property, too. Especially cash, even small amounts--and she had that in her purse. Oh--and guns. The house contained several guns. NO WAY IN HELL is a violent criminal going to pass up stealing at least one of those guns. No way in hell. NOT gonna happen.
If any woman believes it happened that way, then I don't care if she thinks she lives in a safe neighborhood or not. Laci's neighborhood was considered safe enough for people to walk to the park. So any woman who actually thinks it happened that way had better not EVER venture out onto the sidewalk in front of her home, or stay home with any doors unlocked. Because you can just disappear into thin air if you do.
Yes, and yes.
In the case of an admonition to disregard, I think it would be more elaborate than his previous ones. I mean, if the judge really thinks Brocchini committed perjury, then B. is in trouble. Who would (later) prosecute Brocchini for this? (Hee hee... um... the Stanislaus Co. DA?... naw... maybe a special prosecutor...)
And if Distaso is found to have suborned perjury, then he could lose his license.
Both Brocchini and Distaso know the possibilities well, and I don't for a moment think that either of them did this thing--if there even IS a "thing"--deliberately.
ROFL!!!
And all this time I thought you were that male dancer that Amber used to gad about with...
...and if it was one of the homeless people, I guess after they attacked and kidnapped her, they pushed her away in their grocery store cart with the plastic bags of crap!
The homeless people I've seen don't drive around in vans, at least if they're type of homeless that are living in parks.
Ignore away. You are ignoring anything that might go against the decision anyhow.
But, I won't put you on ignore. I'm sure on another thread I will agree with you. Best Regards, BJN
And for those who firmly believe it was done by someone other than Scott, would one of you please tell me where the heck is the shirt Laci was wearing??
The pants lasted through a long time in the water, though they were apparently threadbare. Where's the shirt? How did it, and not the pants, get off her body?
Oh! I forgot! Sometimes rapists or similar sickos take off part of their victim's clothes, don't they?
Yeah, that's it. The sicko took off her shirt. Must've wanted to see her breasts--the scumbag!
But he left her bra on her. Hmmm. So he didn't get a very good view of them, did he?
Oh, and then he raped her. With her pants on. That's it.
Just saw over on websleuths that Nancy Grace is giving an update at 2:30 pacific time on CTV. According to poster she has mentioned bombshell and mistrial in her radio show....
Stay tuned..
Check it out!!
And then the rapist, in order to make sure that the sperm evidence was still there where he had raped her, put her pants back on and taped up her crotch area?
Thanks, will do!
Oh, yeah! Haven't you heard? Geragos found a truckdriver who saw a homeless person pushing their shopping cart, with a big heavy bundle in it, down the highway between Modesto and Berkeley, some time around Dec. 24.
Oh, dang it. I think I must be mixing that up with something about a truckdriver seeing a guy pulling a boat trailer with his pickup truck on that same highway...
For example, the police officer that said he talked to one of Peterson's friends that said Peterson talked about how he would dispose of a body. If the prosecution is never able to produce this witness, why raise an objection. When it comes time to call up the police office, all the defense needs to say is, where is the friend that said this. If they can not produce him and if the officer has been discredited on other issues - as he has - it is not going to look good.
You know, I have not made up my mind on this case. Likely never will be able to because I am not on the jury. But it sure seems like a lot of people have made up their mind that he is guilty and they are getting irritated at me for suggesting he might be innocent.
I sure would hate to be back in the days of some wild west town and you all had a rope in your hand. Anyhow, I will leave all you fine folks alone on this thread. Best Regards, BJN
You're my hero! ;-) LOL
Pinz
LOL. You're pretty brilliant yourself, really, Pinz.
C'mon. Let's assume that someone other than Scott killed her. How would it have happened?
It could've happened... (and, to quote an old line from "Wayne's World", and "monkeys might fly out of my..." well, you get the picture.)
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.