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.
This is one fact that has always disturbed me. If this is true then the neighbor couldn't have much of a thing for dogs. Who would ever put a dog back in a yard with the leash still on? I wouldn't as I would worry that he would get caught on something and be stuck there for who knows how long. Or get twisted in the leash and choke to death.
My biggest fear is that Geragross is muddying up the waters so much, that the jurors are going to be thoroughly confused. I know that he is allowed to do this, but good grief! Hopefully, the jurors will be able to see through the crap and use commonsense. One or maybe even two coincidences could be possible, but everything combined, there is no way that he didn't kill his wife and baby. I wish I were on that jury, but I would have had to lie to get on it, and I would never do that.
I had also heard that Geragross may purposefully had Scott lose those 40 lbs. so that he would look unable to be able to lift Laci. What a slimeball.