[runningbear]

today's court actions and stories....

[Sunshine55]

Where were all of these witnesses before now? Geragos is going to make it look like Snott has been railroaded, no doubt. I hope they show this trial on Court TV, if they do I think I'll take a vacation week or two, just to watch these witnesses get ripped apart on the stand.

[runningbear]

Pinging... Good morning all...

FYI: for those who missed the GW speech and events in San Diego.

President Flies In On Navy Jet, Declares End Of Major Combat

Lots of info...

video clip of GW arriving on the ship

Video clip

part 2

[BunnySlippers]

Good morning, Runningbear! :)

[melodie]

Good morning Rb, and thanks for the ping.

[Wednesday's Child]

Good morning everyone........thanks for the ping RB.

[fellowpatriot]

runningbear, thanks for the pings! I haven't had much time to respond to all of this but I have been trying to keep up with these threads.

If McAllister had any real proof of Scott's innocence, his former client wouldn't be sitting in jail, waiting for the trial to begin.

They're setting the stage to make it look like the MPD is framing Scott, but we all know that Scott did that to himself, all by himself.

At first, I gave Scott the benefit of the doubt. The turning point for me was when he told Diane Sawyer that Laci knew about the affair and was ok with it.

[Lancey Howard]

Los Angeles attorney Mark Garagos -- who has represented high-profile clients like Winona Ryder -- will take over the case Friday morning.

It's funny that Garagaos' most famous client, Susan McDougal, doesn't even get a mention anymore.

[RGSpincich]

The old secret witness ploy, eh? Maybe the OJ jury will show up, too?

Assuming what McAllister says is true about having evidence that will clear SP, why do you suppose SP is waving time? A speedy trial within 60 days and the prelim on May 19th. Why sit in jail for two years waiting for your defense witnesses to die? Show the world that SP didn't do it at the prelim and that there is no reason to hold him over for trial. SP could be teeing it up at Torrey Pines by the 20th and returning some of that jailhouse mail in person by that evening. What's the deal McAllister? Put up or shut uo.

[pbear8]

I know, I know who the secret witness is - it's ROSA LOPEZ !!

[Yeti]

When asked why, he said, "because we investigated it instead of calling press conferences like the police did."

SLAM!!!

I hate to say it, but I will be relieved if he didn't do it, and just because his lawyers don't leak to the tabloids doesn't mean they don't have anything. If they identify the witnesses, they will get death threats and intimidation. But then again, talk is cheap, and no matter how many Enquirer articles are posted, we won't really know until the time comes, will we?

Regarding the postponment, I can't believe anyone here actually thinks that any sane lawyer would recommend that Scott go to trial in the midst of the mob thing that's going on in Modesto right now. They will probably wait to see if they can spring him until the trial, and if they can't they will try to hurry up with the trial, but elsewhere.

[mabelkitty]

His parents or someone in his family is going to perjure and/or obstruct justice.

[SoCar]

I do not have time to read this whole thread so forgive me for any repitition.

The only exculpatory evidence I've heard they have are eyewitness accounts of a woman that looked liked Lacy walking a similiar dog on the morning of the 24th. Completely flimsy and unconvincing.

In every missing person case there are always reports of sightings by "credible" witnesses. Often a body is found afterwards that prove these to be false. Eyewitnesses accounts are unreliable. Good intentioned people are mistaken or others with not so good intentions are lured by the limelight and want to be involved in the case.

Even if these people are correct and Lacy was walking her dog that morning, which is unlikely, the most this can prove is that the prosecution's theory of time of death is wrong. It does not exonerate Scott in any way since he still would have had time to kill her and be at the marina at the time stamped. Often the prosecution makes the mistake of theorizing too much on the time of death and locking themselves into a timeline they cannot prove with certainty. This happened in the O.J. trial. The timeline was later adjusted in the civil case. To a thinking person, disproving the timeline is not the same as casting reasonable doubt on the who committed the murder here.

Having said all that, nobody saw Lacy walking her dog on the 24th. It is obvious she was alraedy dead. But not necessary to prove.

[mass55th]

I want to see how they explain Laci's blood on the mop, and the fact that Peterson said he had to clean up. The housekeeper said she had cleaned the house and there was no need for him to do it. The prosecution will be able to prove numerable times where Peterson has lied, and the jury will convict.

[xm177e2]

The key to Peterson's defense will be the testimony of witnesses uncovered by McAllister, witnesses he says need to be protected, Brown reported.

"I'm protecting witnesses, because I have concerns for them if I go public," he said.

When some lawyer scumbag says he has "new evidence" in a case like this, it means he's going to come out with some outlandish theory slandering Laci, like tying her to drug dealers (isn't that what those creeps did to Nicole Brown Simpson?)

[freedumb2003]

Until I saw the picture in the post, I thought they were talking about this: