Michael Looby (top center) recounts for jurors Tuesday his discovery of the remains of Scott Peterson's son.
Posted on 07/07/2004 5:55:51 AM PDT by runningbear
Grusome Testimony About Baby's Body in Peterson Case
Grusome Testimony About Baby's Body in Peterson Case
Scott Peterson is accused of killing his wife Laci and her unborn child.
Len Ramirez
Testimony in the Scott Peterson double-murder case was so heart-wrenching Tuesday that Laci Peterson's family left the courtroom.
Witness Michael Looby described walking on the shore of San Francisco Bay after a storm in April of 2003 and finding the decomposing body of a baby. Laci's mother and stepfather Sharon Rocha and Ron Grantski and her brother Brent Rocha quickly left the courtroom during the.......
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TESTIMONY TOO MUCH FOR LACI'S KIN, JURORS
TESTIMONY TOO MUCH FOR LACI'S KIN, JURORS
By HOWARD BREUER
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
July 7, 2004 -- REDWOOD CITY, Calif. — Laci Peterson's mom, stepdad and brother rushed out of court yesterday as a witness took the stand to describe how he found her fetus washed up on a bay shore.
Even some jurors appeared disturbed by photos of the bodies of the unborn baby boy and Laci that were displayed — cupping their hands over their mouths as if sickened, and rubbing their foreheads.
The body of the unborn boy — whom the Petersons planned to name Conner — was found Sunday, April 13, 2003, a day before his mother's headless torso was discovered nearby.
Both washed ashore in the San Francisco Bay, near where Laci's husband, Scott — who is on trial for their deaths — says he went fishing the previous Christmas Eve. That was the day he reported the eight-months-pregnant Laci missing.
"As you're walking along, does something attract your attention or your dog's attention?" prosecutor Dave Harris asked witness Michael Looby. .......
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Laci's family stunned by large-screen images of decomposed bodies
Article Last Updated: Wednesday, July 07, 2004 - 3:35:40 AM PST
Grisly photos shock trial
Laci's family stunned by large-screen images of decomposed bodies
By Jason Dearen, STAFF WRITER
REDWOOD CITY -- Grim photos of Laci Peterson and her unborn child's badly decomposed bodies were projected on a large screen in the Scott Peterson double-murder trial Tuesday, evoking gasps from the seating gallery and forcing the dead woman's family to flee the courtroom.
When the macabre images were shown, the defendant's mother, Jacqueline Peterson, covered her eyes, slumping down in her chair.
Determining the age and condition of the fetus' remains are instrumental to both sides' theories about how Laci Peterson died -- and could be the deciding factor in the case. Defense attorney Mark Geragos promised the jury during opening statements that he will prove that the baby was 36 to 38 weeks old before it died. .........
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peterson trial witness describes finding infant's body
Peterson trial witness describes finding infant's body
Stacy Finz and Diana Walsh, Chronicle Staff Writers
Tuesday, July 6, 2004
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Laci Peterson’s family rushed out of the courtroom this morning, minutes before a witness described finding the body of the Modesto woman’s infant on the Richmond shoreline.
Scott Peterson, on trial in Redwood City for allegedly murdering his wife and their unborn child, watched the witness attentively.
Michael Looby said he and his wife were walking their dog along the beach near Point Isabel on April 13, 2003, looking for a good spot for the dog to take a swim. The tide was low, so they decided to take a walk down the coastline instead, Looby testified for the prosecution.
When they got to a point where the sand ended, they climbed over some rocks into a marshy area. It was there, Looby said, that he saw the tiny corpse. ........
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peterson denied affair, polygraph expert testifies
Peterson denied affair, polygraph expert testifies
Tuesday, July 6, 2004 Posted: 5:07 PM EDT (2107 GMT)
REDWOOD CITY, California (AP) -- A day after his wife, Laci, disappeared, Scott Peterson told a state polygraph expert that he was not having an affair and that his marriage was fine, the expert testified Tuesday at Peterson's murder trial.
Peterson was, in fact, having an affair with a massage therapist, Amber Frey. Prosecutors have suggested that he killed his pregnant wife so that he could be with Frey.
Douglas Mansfield said he interviewed Peterson on Christmas Day 2002.
"He said there was no third ......
_-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peterson looks away as jury sees graphic photos of wife, child
Michael Looby (top center) recounts for jurors Tuesday his discovery of the remains of Scott Peterson's son.
Peterson looks away as jury sees graphic photos of wife, child
By Harriet Ryan
Court TV
REDWOOD CITY, Calif. — Scott Peterson turned away as prosecutors displayed graphic photos of his slain wife and unborn child at his capital trial Tuesday.
The double-murder defendant angled his chair to the side and stared toward away across the courtroom as the gory images of the severely decomposed bodies were flashed onto a giant projection screen.
Several jurors appeared disturbed by the pictures of Laci Peterson and the baby the couple planned to name Conner. One female panelist put her hand to her temple when she first glimpsed a photo of the baby's body. Another woman looked away entirely.
The pictures accompanied testimony about the separate discoveries of the mother-to-be and child on April 13 and April 14, 2003. A dog walker found the boy's remains in grassy marshland on the shores of San Francisco Bay. The next day, about a mile away, another dog owner came across Laci Peterson's body wedged in some rocks on the bayshore.
Story continues ..........
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Exclusive document reveals identity of Peterson defense's 'mystery woman'
Exclusive document reveals identity of Peterson defense's 'mystery woman'
(Court TV) — What do a gold watch, a brown van and an eBay auction have in common?
According to documents obtained by Court TV's Catherine Crier, they resurrect defense attorney Mark Geragos' theory that Satanists in a brown van were involved in the murders of Laci Peterson and her unborn son.
Deanna Renfro pawned a gold watch like one belonging to Laci Peterson.
The host of Court TV's "Crier Live" obtained a pawn shop receipt revealing the identity of a "mystery woman" cited by Scott Peterson's lawyer and her possible connection to the owners of a brown van allegedly spotted in the Petersons' neighborhood before her disappearance.
The document indicates that Deanna Renfro pawned a gold Croton watch six days after Laci Peterson's disappearance — a gold watch almost identical to one Laci tried to auction on eBay weeks earlier, according to the records of the Petersons' eBay account.
Laci Peterson, 27, disappeared Dec. 24, 2002. Four days later, a rape crisis counselor told police that an unidentified woman reported she had been raped by two men and two women in a brown van during a satanic ritual.
A watch Laci Peterson attempted to sell on eBay
According to the counselor's account, the victim said that, during the ritual, the group mentioned a Christmas day death, one she would read about in the papers.
When police tracked down the van to a nearby campsite on Dec. 30, among the four people in the van were Donny and Mary Renfrow. Court TV sources indicated that Deanna Renfro (despite a different spelling in documents) is related to the Renfrows and may be Donny Renfrow's daughter.
The receipt from the pawn shop indicates that, the day after the police visit to the campsite, Deanna Renfro, who has a long criminal history including at least one methamphetamine arrest, pawned the gold Croton watch for $20.
The pawn shop where Deanna Renfo pawned a gold Croton watch for $20.
The bodies of Laci Peterson and her unborn son were found four months later on the shore of San Francisco Bay. Her husband, Scott, faces the death penalty if convicted of both murders.
"Is the pawned watch the same as Laci's? Are the Renfrows related?" Crier said. "Court TV is working to resolve these unanswered questions, but in the meantime, a conspiracy theory is born."...........
If Geragos successfully proves the baby was as developed as that, it could exonerate his client. Prosecutors believe the baby died on Dec. 23 or 24, 2002, which would have made the fetus 33 weeks old. Peterson was under intense surveillance after Dec. 24, so if Geragos proves the baby was alive two or three weeks after Laci's disappearance, it would go a long way to disproving the prosecution's scenario.
(Excerpt) Read more at cbs5.com ...
Don't worry, CO, every time Justin opens his rather ignorant little mouth, he gives the prosecution some ideas. I believe they did this demonstration with the pregnant woman BECAUSE of what Justin said on TV--that he "didn't know how she would fit in the boat."
Well, now the jury knows that she WOULD fit in the boat.
I heard that in the testimony, supposedly Scott told Mansfield (CA D.O.J. investigator) that he did often wash his own clothes, b/c he would get fertilizer on them.
Yep, they're trying to cover that base.
Very good thought, about why he covered TWO days with his fishing license. He knew he'd be working at night, and midnight could come and go before he was finished!
I don't think they'll be allowed to use a body language expert, but they WILL be allowed to show the interviews!
MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM!!!!
Caesarian right then. Fetal distress.
----
I guess we need a Dr. or a Nurse.. Isn't that TOXIC SHOCK.. or Toxemia.??? Eggs-perts thought I had that...but I didn't....
LOL!! That's right, shrimp don't have these complications!
Hey, I used to have some pet shrimp. Of course, they weren't the yummy kind we eat. They were called brine shrimp. Tiny. I had them in a fish bowl in my dorm room. Unfortunately there were also two tiny crabs in the water. (One, about an inch big, the other, about half an inch.)
Imagine my horror when I saw the bigger crab stuff the shrimp, one by one, into his mouth! Then, a day later, the smaller crab was gone... by this time, I was tired of the carnage and dumped the remaining crab back into the bayou.
Darn! Have you ever heard of anything like this being allowed in court?
I can't believe that this pea braiin is STILL getting air time. Mostly from Greta however and I think we know WHY she would want him.
I think that is toxemia. Very dangerous!
But fetal distress can occur for any of a whole variety of reasons (such as... the mother is in the process of being murdered). Sometimes, for example, there's that situation where the umbilical cord gets crimped or folded or something, cutting off the baby's oxygen... something like that.
We have at least two (actually I think there are more) RN's on here: Canadian Outrage, and Velveeta.
No, but at least we can take comfort in the fact that the jurors will also be noticing his mannerisms. I think it's just human nature to get a "feel" for someone's attitude, by watching them while they are talking. I think at least some of the jurors are going to feel doubtful of Scott, the same way some of us do when we see his mannerisms in those videos. Such as his looking away when speaking. That really looks bad.
He should never have given those interviews. He is a total fool for doing that.
In that case, I'm glad I've missed Greta lately. I hope the IRS starts watching Justin, who is probably getting paid a little tidbit for each of his interviews.
You know, I know, and most everyone else believes that he murdered Laci and her baby. But, is 'believing' this enough to convict him?
I never thought that, but believe me, I am very ignorant on the ins and outs of medical conditions! We need to ask CO or Vel.
It will be, if the jury believes it.
Here's what I've been doing: After reading about the various facts that have been proven so far, and also including info from sources I believe to be reliable, I then have tried to figure a way someone OTHER than Scott may have killed Laci.
When would it have happened?
Where? It must've been in or close to her home, b/c her car never left the driveway, and was found there when he got home. And her keys were in her purse. No one drove the car that day. Or, if Laci did drive that day, she made it home safely.
Why did the killer take her dead body 90 miles away?
If they did put her in the Bay to "frame Scott", then how did they know Scott had been there that day? How early was it really widely reported that he had said he was there? In the early reports, did they really give a specific area where Scott said he'd been? I don't think so.
Why would anyone who was a stranger to her not simply walk (or run) away, the way almost all other murderers do when they kill a stranger in a crime of opportunity? It's much less risky for the killer that way--UNLESS the killer is someone the police know was an associate of the dead person.
Only 12 minutes available--if it really happened "as she walked the dog". How far away from home could this tired pregnant woman, who was having dizziness, trouble walking, etc., have really gotten in such a short time? And there were people all over Covena during the specified time.
Okay, if it didn't happen in the 12 minutes btw Scott's leaving and the dog's being found, then we could say she maybe walked the dog later, and got abducted/killed later?
Okay, but if it happened that way--if she was ripped away from her dog later than 10:18, then how did the dog end up back in the closed yard, wearing his leash? B/C that's how Scott says he found him.
If the abduction didn't happen in those 12 minutes, then what IS the explanation for their dog's being wandering out there with his leash on?
Suppose the dog had his leash on for whatever reason, got out, and got put back in, and Laci never walked him? But instead, suppose Laci just went out walking w/o the dog, later in the day? So she is abducted wearing the black pants/white shirt which Scott says she wore on the 24th, but her body turns up wearing TAN pants and NO shirt? And the shirt is found wadded up in a drawer? Does this mean Laci went out walking with no shirt??
And if they grabbed her, how is it that this "spitfire" (that's Geragos' assessment of her) was grabbed, but didn't scream, leave drag marks... how come no one heard screeching tires? How come no one saw it happen? It was daytime and most people were off work that day. And how come she'd have been out walking alone w/o her cellphone, pepper spray, and KEYS???
They were worried about bums going down their street, but she'd have gone out walking w/o her keys, meaning she'd have left a door open? Who in their right mind would do that, if they were worried about bums in their neighborhood?
Seriously, if you go over the possibilities, you'll be amazed at the results. I know I was.
unless the phases of the moon are different on the west coast here in florida we usually have a full moon near the middle of the month and near the end of month..24th would not be its fullest but be a good portion of it
its gruesome to think about but funeral parlor have to break the arms at the elbow to lay the across the chest like they do
Really?? Ewwwwww!!
And on here someone said it's easier to break the bones when the person is dead?
Well, it was you, wasn't it, that gave us the time frame in which rigor mortis sets in? That 5 hours of gradual stiffening leaves plenty of time for someone to get rid of the body!
AHA!!! Fiesti, that gives me an idea! You did say 5 hours, didn't you? It doesn't seem likely to me that he'd have sat up quietly till she'd been asleep for several hours, then have attacked her and killed her. Why would he wait? If he wanted her to be asleep when he attacked her, then surely he wouldn't have had to wait that long... surely she went to bed well b/f midnight. She was tired all the time!
So that means he probably killed her b/f midnight. (Why wait?) So that means that he'd have had to get it all done in the next 5 hours. So, it must've been pretty well done at least a little before 5 a.m.
UNLESS he somehow talked her into going driving in his truck, and killed her at the end of the "drive". That's not likely b/c the police have said they believe she was killed in the house.
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.