Scott Peterson approached a friend about selling his house four weeks after his pregnant wife vanished, according to taped phone calls played at his murder trial
Posted on 08/30/2004 5:25:22 AM PDT by runningbear
Report: Scott Peterson's friend thought his behavior was suspicious
Scott Peterson approached a friend about selling his house four weeks after his pregnant wife vanished, according to taped phone calls played at his murder trial
Report: Scott Peterson's friend thought his behavior was suspicious
(Court TV) — One of Scott Peterson's close friends told police he was suspicious of the alibi the fertilizer salesman gave detectives after his pregnant wife vanished, according to a police report obtained exclusively by Court TV's Catherine Crier.
"[His] fishing story is fishy," Brian Argain told a detective less than two weeks after Laci Peterson went missing.
Peterson claimed he was fishing in San Francisco Bay when his wife was abducted on Dec. 24, 2002, near the couple's Modesto home.
In the police report obtained by Crier, however, Argain told police that although he considered himself a "good friend" of Scott Peterson's, "his story isn't making any sense."
Story continues .....
Scott Peterson's Internet Searches Dissected At Trial
Scott Peterson's Internet Searches Dissected At Trial
POSTED: 11:24 am PDT August 27, 2004
REDWOOD CITY, Calif. -- Testimony in the Peterson murder trial is returning to Scott Peterson's Internet searches.
During testimony Thursday, a computer expert told the court that an analysis of computers seized from Peterson showed that he was checking the Internet for ads for used boats less than three weeks before his wife disappeared.
Lydell Wall of the Stanislaus County Sheriff's Department also told the court that Peterson also looked at Web sites for fishing information, currents in San Francisco Bay and details on boat ramps in the area.......
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
THE PETERSON TRIAL
Defense challenges Internet search dates
Testimony in Scott Peterson's double-murder trial drastically switched Thursday from sex, lies and audiotape to fishing.
Defense lawyer Mark Geragos spent the latter part of the day trying to shred the prosecution's theory that Peterson's Dec. 24, 2002, fishing trip was all part of a grand scheme to murder his pregnant wife, Laci.
Stanislaus County Deputy District Attorneys Rick Distaso and Dave Harris maintain that Peterson began researching San Francisco Bay -- as a possible dump site for his wife's body -- after his lover's pal confronted him Dec. 6, 2002, about withholding the fact that he was a married man.............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Written statement to Assembly Public Safety Committee; 8/25/04
Written statement to Assembly Public Safety Committee; 8/25/04
Last Updated: August 27, 2004, 05:25:00 AM PDT
My name is Sharon Rocha and I am the mother of Laci Peterson.
While so many people were home, enjoying the Christmas holidays, the Modesto Police Department, Stanislaus County Sheriff’s Department, Modesto Fire Department and numerous other agencies along with hundreds of volunteers were searching for my daughter. All of these people spent the Christmas holidays away from their families, working, searching.
Their families also sacrificed and missed having their loved ones at ome for Christmas, where they should have been.
So many dedicated members of these agencies worked weeks at a time, without a single day off, searching for Laci. Hundreds of man hours and hundreds of thousands of dollars were spent trying to find Laci. They never gave up...........
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Senate balks at paying county, city for Peterson case
SACRAMENTO -- A bill that would have provided a financial bailout for the Scott Peterson case died early Saturday as lawmakers wrapped up their work for the year without approving millions of dollars in state aid for local police and prosecutors. In a marathon session that ended about 3:30 a.m., Senate Democrats held off a final vote on the proposal because of concerns about the potential cost of the trial and investigation into Laci Peterson's disappearance.
The bill would have let the city of Modesto, Stanislaus County and San Mateo County, which is holding the double-murder trial because it was moved after extensive media coverage, tap into a state fund set aside for expensive murder trials in small and medium-sized counties.
Stanislaus County can apply and compete for a partial reimbursement from the $5 million trial-subsidy fund, but county officials would have to put up a $1.4 million deductible before receiving state aid.......
_--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pinging.......
Pinging.......
Pinging.......
A key bill designed to fund the investigation and prosecution of Scott Peterson did not pass. Scott Peterson is charged with murder of his wife Laci, and her unborn child, Conner.
The leadership of both the Assembly and Senate had previously agreed to work in a bipartisan way to fund the costs of the Peterson trial.
But, Merced Senator Jeff Denham says Dierdre Alpert(Sen. Dierdre Alpert, D-San Diego) reneged on the deal.
Denham's Senate Bill 592 would have provided state funding reimbursement to the city of Modesto's police department.
Guess we know where the San Diego Democrats stand.
My question is: WHO tipped off Amber's friend? I haven't heard anyone mentioned BUT I'm thinking that someone else called Scott on the 5th to let him know that the "marriage info" slipped out. It's why Scott was so quick with the "I lost my wife" line he gave to Amber.
This week is dog testimony. I imagine this was done VERY SOON after the murder. I'd say that the Bay was well observed as soon as Scott handed the police his dock receipt and it made the news, making a plot to frame Scott 100% impossible. Why would anyone take an EXTRA chance of getting caught??
Let's face it. Scott is simply not "smart". In fact, I think if you did a little research, you would find that he was stupid, inconsistent and one big time liar. You don't belong to a $25,000 a year golf club if you're having trouble with your bills.
Why anyone follows this stuff is beyond me.
Thanks for the ping - another week begins!
You have a choice. If you don't like the subject then don't click on the thread. :o)
JEFFREY FEIGER !! right?
I'm still not positive that the web page Geragos says was pulled up on the 5th, was really pulled up that day. Apparently it is a bit more complicated than I thought to see what day a person actually did a computer search. I think Geragos is throwing out another red herring there.
Regarding who told Shawn, I think Shawn had occasion to talk to Eric Olsen, who worked for Scott. She asked him if Scott was married, and he said you'll have to ask Scott. I don't know why she asked him, though. Can't remember. But you're right--if she heard something BEFORE that caused her to ask Olsen that question, then we'd want to know what that was she heard BEFORE. If I ever knew the answer, I don't remember it now.
He says, "What elements of first-degree murder are proved by the wiretap tapes?"
Someone needs to tell "Wudge" that INTENT is an element of first-degree murder. And INTENT is something which is within the defendant's mind. And since (under the law) we can never rely on a defendant to speak out and incriminate himself, that means that INTENT can only be proved by the state through CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE. That is ALL they can use! Because we can't get some hocus-pocus device and look inside Scottie-poo's brain and say, "See that wrinkle there? That's the one where he had the intent to kill his wife and child."
Yes, the wiretaps are telling us about his mind AFTER the "disappearance". But, sorry, no one knew they were going to need to prove his state of mind before/during her murder. So they didn't listen in on his words back then!
I'd say my words, for example, are a fair indicator of what my state of mind was, say, a month ago. One can read this and see that I think he is guilty, and that I've almost surely thought that for more than a month!
So they used Scott's words, as short a time as a week after the event, to show what his state of mind most probably was in the month of December.
So the wiretaps tend to prove INTENT,
which is a necessary element of first-degree murder.
My opinion is that "Wudge" is just a biased fool who is perhaps a bit irritated that the outcome of this trial will not be something that makes him look prescient. Pathetic.
"His lie came true"...all by itself?
Not for nothing, but I'd say he planned this well before December.....like as soon as she got pregnant. I wonder if the pregnancy was an accident??
I think we have a couple little pieces missing here but I'm not sure what? The secret might be in the tarp, the tape, rope or a winch, plier marks on the tarp rivets (if there were any)...I'm sure there is one piece of physical evidence that holds the secret.
It may be as simple as someone seeing SCOTT with the dog at the end of their normal walking trail while everyone else was thinking and trying to remember "Laci with the dog".
Exactly--he was already talking about "losing" his wife, in early December. That gives us a window into his state of mind. His state of mind is what is important when proving INTENT. And the only way for the prosecution to prove that he spoke of "losing" his wife in early December, was to bring in the witnesses he spoke to, and the wiretaps, which are just more proof of same.
Which is why "Wudge" is a moron, lol.
The circumstantial evidence is just painting the scene, bit by bit. One good thing with such evidence is, if one bit of it turns out to be inaccurate, the rest of the "painting" is still there.
One thing that tells me she didn't leave the house alive is the ranch dressing mess on the counter. I don't think she would have left that there, even to go on a walk. Who wants to clean up DRIED ranch dressing when you can clean it up wet right away in a couple of swipes.
Did Scott say they ate breakfast together? Were there two dishes not one? Men don't pay attention to those details...women do.
Sometimes, I think that they should put a female investigator on these "female missing" type cases. We see with different eyes.
Did Scott consciously or unconsciously try to duplicate the dog scenario of OJ? It played an important part in the "time" sequence.
A Rat is a Rat is a Rat huh RG?
Shawn Sibley found out about Peterson being married from another EMPLOYEE of Tradecorp!! In fact she phoned Eric Olsen who worked for Scott and asked him. He told her to ask Scott herself.
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.