Posted on 08/19/2004 5:13:15 AM PDT by runningbear
August 19, 2004 -- REDWOOD CITY, Calif. — Laci Peterson's furious mother called her son-in-law a "f---ing liar" and begged him to tell her where he ditched the body, it was revealed yesterday — as Scott Peterson's murder trial screeched to a halt due to a mysterious "potential development Sharon Rocha became convinced of Peterson's guilt in January 2003, not long after his affair with Amber Frey became public.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
Okay, Red, whatever it was we said, you have a nice day, too!
Before this delay a number of defense lawyers were screaming regarding the tapes, that the prosecution had put on too much evidence. Wonder what they'll say if it is true that slimy Geragos is demanding that more tapes should be played. I don't see how he can tell the prosecution how to handle the case.
'I'm gonna do some cleaning up with your post, bonfire!'
I owe you one!!
Thanks MEG for the link. It is a very good analysis of why Scott probably commited these murders.
I have a couple of questions about some of what was written though.
From Article:"Yet the blouse she was sporting that night was discovered the next day by investigators on her bedroom floor. Baker cogently argues that the physical “evidence” the experts deny exists is buried within this “otherwise negligible detail”--that Laci was not wearing her shirt when searchers fished her out of the bay. Why is this one tidbit so damning? Because it suggests an approximate time and method. Because it suggests that Scott slithered up behind his wife and strangled her while she was pulling her top up over her head. Because it suggests that Laci, swallowing mouthfuls of fabric, fought for her very life--and it was this pitched battle that produced those cuts and abrasions on Scott’s hands for which no account is rendered. Death by asphyxiation also explains why little or no blood pervaded the scene.
I thought the top/blouse was found in the hamper. Also I thought that I read no cuts or abrasions were found on Scott. (Even thought he said they would probably find blood in his truck cause he always cuts himself)
Did you ever get those transcripts that you were asking liz4404 about. Exactly what Amy said in her testimony about the clothing Laci was wearing and what she later found in the house?
They don't have to turn their evidence over to the defense, Spunky. Obviously, if it's documents, the simplest thing to do is run a xerox copy and give that to the defense. Other things (including originals of documents, if it's an issue), they just have to make them AVAILABLE to the defense for inspection. This would apply to equipment. For example, many or most police cars have a videocam in them that videos the prisoner(s) being transported. Suppose something happens on that videotape, something that the prosecution decides is evidence--the cops don't have to turn over their video equipment to the defense, just make it available for the defense to inspect and maybe test.
The only thing, really, that makes one wonder, is: 27,000 pages??!? THAT much?? That is what seems out of the ordinary.
But regarding the surveillance camera, I seem to remember hearing that it didn't get set up till after the "disappearance". I also have a vague memory that it only recorded when persons (including Scott) entered or left the Peterson premises. It was mainly there to help the police know when to get ready to follow Scott somewhere. (He often foiled the GPS by using other vehicles.)
The FBI themselves may have set it up. They may have been invited in, or may have simply jumped in, early on, when it seemed like this could well be a ransom kidnapping. (Consider that some police may have already heard from family that there was $2.1 million indirectly related to this case--that's what the 3 Rocha kids stood to inherit.)
I think once it was determined by all police involved that this was NOT a ransom kidnapping (lack of any ransom note or calls or other communications), the FBI took backstage, and the locals took over completely.
And I also notice that today they were saying that "maybe the police didn't train Amber well enough to do an effective job of getting information out of him."
Whereas, if the police HAD had major sessions with expert interrogators teaching Amber to be The Grand Inquisitor, these same talking head bozoes would be saying, "Her results can't be valid--she was a robot of the police, using all sorts of fancy, over-the-top, interrogation methods on this poor man."
And one attorney at least had the decency to clarify that there is definitely NO ENTRAPMENT even remotely related to this case. Entrapment, if it is there, is a condition which begins its existence BEFORE THE CRIME OCCURS. It is the police creating a situation in which the defendant ends up doing some crime that he would not have done, if it hadn't been for the artificial police-created situation they put him in. Entrapment is NOT just using clever, underhanded ways to trick a confession out of a defendant.
It appears that no one was careful, or suspicious, enough to take a good, hard, look at Scott's hands, on the evening of the 24th.
But he said later that he had cut his knuckle that day of the disappearance, while reaching into his toolbox. We have to wonder why on earth he would make such a gratuitous admission if he had not had a cut on his hand which he'd felt the need to explain.
Interesting that this article says the top was found on the floor. I had never heard that. I think maybe the author just made an error. Either way, in the hamper, or on the floor, sounds incriminating to me, considering that it was part of an outfit the dead person was wearing, and the rest of the outfit was on her body, but not the blouse. As for "on the floor", for some reason thinking that that was where it was found makes the find sound even more incriminating.
I should read more carefully before I say I agree with ALL in an article..The blouse was in the hamper on the 24th,later found on the Feb search balled up in a drawer...and there was no testimony about Scott having cuts visable...I don't think they photographed his hands on the night of the 24th..Scott put out the word about always cutting his hands...
Amy's testimony is very shaky...and I am trying hard to review the testimony and discern what pictures they were discussing....She could only say similar, right color and capri length that she wore on the 23rd to the salon and then washed up in...She eliminated two in pictures because of color or length/style.Geragos got her going..and she said yes when asked if she thought she had found the whole outfit on the Feb18th search..She did not recall the stitching at the bottom or a crease...but the length and color she did of the pants Laci was wearing..
The other poster is still pushing his view and I have yet to rebut because quoting a small excerpt of testimony isn't enough to clarify it.
See 328...I liked her take on Scott and failed to note the error about the blouse..
Didn't the prosecution in rebuttal ask her if she "was sure." they had found the "whole outfit?" Or ask her something that would let the jury understand she had not seen the whole outfit in the home.
He went back over the pictures and her memory..not the "thought"...recall she is a very unsure witness that actually did well in modelling the capri pants length, which on someone as short as Laci is to the ankle.
The jury has the pictures and knows exactly what they are talking about..!
who sounds strangely as if she’d just inhaled helium.
Also sums up the description of grown women with disgusting, whiny, little girl voices.
The article does not place the blouse correctly in the hamper...but I thought it captured Scott well!
I think sociopath Scott got to Janey...one poster suggested privately to me in more ways than just her mind!I won't go that far but she is "amazing" with her undying devotion...just the kind Scott craves.
If scott had an accomplice Janey would be my first suspect
whoa! That is some fired up journalist...... ;o)
LOL!...Good read..even with some factual "oops".
entrapment; Hubby told me the same thing as you... ;o)
BINGO !!!! I knew there was something going down, where he gets all his money, esp cash. This will be very interesting to see how it develops but maybe Lee is involved and Geragross has been paid with drug money....they should check it out and take the money back if true !
Have fun and GOOD LUCK!
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.