Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Laci's things in tug of war
The Modesto Bee ^ | May 31, 2003 | Garth Stapely and John Cote'

Posted on 05/31/2003 8:41:50 AM PDT by runningbear

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 821-840841-860861-880881-894 next last
To: Devil_Anse
But you forgot the presumption of innocence "thingie".

YOu are repeating yourself - are you ok?

861 posted on 06/02/2003 5:33:01 AM PDT by Chad Fairbanks (A blind man received a cheese grater as a gift - said it was the most violent thing he had ever read)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 805 | View Replies]

To: Devil_Anse
Oh, and goodness, you don't suppose that vehicle of Laci's Scott sold might have been property that her heirs had a claim on? Gee, where'd the funds from that go, anyway?

Beats me - who's name was the vehicle registered under? His? Hers? Both? And why not ask that of Scott Peterson, he's the jerk who sold it...

862 posted on 06/02/2003 5:34:33 AM PDT by Chad Fairbanks (A blind man received a cheese grater as a gift - said it was the most violent thing he had ever read)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 808 | View Replies]

To: Devil_Anse
Do us a favor and do a quick trial on whether Scott murdered Laci, 'kay? People are on the edge of their seats waiting to find out

You ARE kidding, right? He's alteady been convicted by most here... Why bother with a trial at all?

863 posted on 06/02/2003 5:35:27 AM PDT by Chad Fairbanks (A blind man received a cheese grater as a gift - said it was the most violent thing he had ever read)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 816 | View Replies]

To: Devil_Anse
Yeah, GrandMoM--why'n't you say something sensible, like a one-line post that says "The DA is a moron"?

Why do that, when calling some with whom you disagree 'a lunatic' is easier than debating?

But hey, don't let facts get in your way or anything, as I'd hate to see you inconvenienced in any way...

864 posted on 06/02/2003 5:37:50 AM PDT by Chad Fairbanks (A blind man received a cheese grater as a gift - said it was the most violent thing he had ever read)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 832 | View Replies]

To: Devil_Anse
Wow... this one sure shows it's "not about me".

Pay attention. You look less foolish that way...

865 posted on 06/02/2003 5:40:06 AM PDT by Chad Fairbanks (A blind man received a cheese grater as a gift - said it was the most violent thing he had ever read)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 849 | View Replies]

To: Devil_Anse
How does community property pass in CA, as a general rule?

Community property means that all income earned within the marriage is owned equally by the spouses, and all property bought with CP funds is also CP. There is a presumption that property owned by a married person is CP, but that can be overcome by a showing that it was owned before the marriage, or given to a spouse by someone as their separate property (like an inheritance).

When a married person dies without a will, their property (which is a 1/2 interest in their community property) passes to their heirs. When a married person dies childless, their only heir is their spouse, and all the CP would therefore pass to the spouse.

If Scott becomes ineligible to inherit from Laci because he is proven to have killed her, then the succession would go to Laci's parents, then her siblings, and then you get into cousins, uncles, etc.

Police are immune from suit for most things, but I think you could get to a jury on a cop intentionally allowing a person to rob another person.

866 posted on 06/02/2003 9:00:46 AM PDT by Defiant (Bush as philosopher: "I-raq, therefore I-ran.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 834 | View Replies]

To: RGSpincich
Thank you for the link. That was helpful. I knew that one could not inherit property from someone who the heir murders, but I did not know that the joint ownership is terminated by law either.

Weiford noted that if a death certificate lists the cause of death as unknown or involving violence, the title and sales process is halted and the situation investigated.

Under the state Probate Code, if a joint tenant feloniously and intentionally kills another joint tenant, "the killer has no rights by survivorship."

I think what they mean is that the title company would not issue clear title and thus no normal sale could proceed until the issue of guilt or innocence is established, if the issue is contested. Thus, the property automatically goes to the survivor unless someone raises an objection. I imagine that the objection would have to be raised in court, and then the court would put a lien of some kind, perhaps a lis pendens, on the property while the determination is being made.

However, no one has, to my knowledge, gone to court to contest Scott's right of survivorship. As of now, he is 100 percent owner of the house, by law.

Scott would still be half owner of the house, the only issue would be Laci's 1/2 interest in the house and who it went to. Also, Scott would be the only person right now with the right to possess the house, and he could designate who can go in and who cannot. All others, such as the Rochas, are trespassers.

That's a legalistic view of it. I feel for the Rochas, and understand their desire to collect some things of Laci's to keep. It's the job of the cops to intervene between emotions and the proper way of doing things, and the cops let us down in this instance. They should have told the Rochas to go get a court order. Their conduct means that any of us in any kind of dispute could have our homes invaded by someone claiming that it's a "civil matter" and if the cops are on their side, they can take our property and force us to sue to get it back.

867 posted on 06/02/2003 9:14:01 AM PDT by Defiant (Bush as philosopher: "I-raq, therefore I-ran.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 786 | View Replies]

Comment #868 Removed by Moderator

Comment #869 Removed by Moderator

Comment #870 Removed by Moderator

To: runningbear
this is getting so old
871 posted on 06/02/2003 10:49:29 AM PDT by ezo4
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: allyoop77
Give it up, he's not going to answer your well thought out question according to HIS definitions of right and wrong.

I already answered that question - several times. Nice try though - and by the way, common courtesy would have dictated that you ping me, when discussing me... Thanks in advance :0)

872 posted on 06/02/2003 10:58:30 AM PDT by Chad Fairbanks (A blind man received a cheese grater as a gift - said it was the most violent thing he had ever read)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 869 | View Replies]

Comment #873 Removed by Moderator

To: Jackie-O
Why doesn't anyone jump back at Janey or Lee with that when they come up with this crap??

I am playing catch up having been gone for over a week, but just wanted to comment on this phenomenon, Jackie.

For the same reason dems get away with their outrageous lies, defense attorneys and their clients are presented via some in the media to their viewers and readers and granted an air of credibility: Certain members of the media actually ADMIRE overt deceit.

Remember during the clinton reign certain press types would openly marvel at the spin put out by the administration and the clintons, themselves. Same with criminals. I watched Menendez and OJ and was aghast as one made-up scenario after another was discussed and then the in-studio commentators didn't laugh at it---they actually would discuss how this could add up to "reasonable doubt" for certain jurors. They were right. (Thank goodness in Menendez it wasn't the whole jury and the non-televised retrial reached the correct guilty verdict.)

There is a certain segment of the population that wants to buy into spin and lies.

P.S. One of the worst reporters in the WH press briefings is Terry Moran. Before ABC hired him he was with Court TV and one of the most eager to take a defense line and run with it.

874 posted on 06/02/2003 11:25:04 AM PDT by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 347 | View Replies]

Comment #875 Removed by Moderator

Comment #876 Removed by Moderator

Comment #877 Removed by Moderator

Comment #878 Removed by Moderator

To: allyoop77
IMO, the Rocha's should have started proceedings AT LEAST a few weeks ago to get the 'family heirlooms' back immediately (furniture, grandma's stuff, etc.) with Laci and Conner gone, Scott has no need for the Rocha heirlooms.

Perhaps, but even if they had started such proceedings, they would not have a right to possession of anything of Laci's until after Scott's guilt is proven in a court of law. That is Scott's property, unless and until he is found guilty. They used the Modesto Cop Self Help Remedy to obtain by force what they could not have legally.

I was convinced 99.9 percent of the guilt of the guy who supposedly killed Elizabeth Smart. I was horrified when I read about the boys who killed their sister in Escondido. Then it turned out that these people didn't do it. I agree that it looks pretty darn bad for Scott, but I stick by my prediction that he won't be convicted unless the prosecution comes up with evidence tying him to the bodies. Placing him in the bay won't be enough by itself, not with burglars casing the neighborhood, not in the absence of blood in the house, not with an autopsy that could be interpreted as some kind of ritual killing, not with a dog wandering and a neighbor who claims he saw a pregnant lady walking a dog.

When they come up with that additional evidence that I haven't heard about yet, I'll be one of the first to jump on the bandwagon, believe me. I think he did it, but not beyond a reasonable doubt. Give me a fingerprint on the duct tape, and I'll be ready to hang. But right now, it's a little premature. And it remains his property that was taken from his house.

879 posted on 06/02/2003 12:30:39 PM PDT by Defiant (Bush as philosopher: "I-raq, therefore I-ran.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 877 | View Replies]

Comment #880 Removed by Moderator


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 821-840841-860861-880881-894 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson