PALS PORTRAY LACI'S KILLER AS ST. SCOTT

New York Post ^ | 12/03/04 | HOWARD BREUER

[DoughtyOne]

Yes, but not blue countiers, at least I don't think so.

[freedumb2003]

The problem is they AREN'T begging for his life. What they are trying to do is "humanize" him, which is a big mistake.

A LOT of people were deeply offended by the WWSD (What Would Scott Do?) reference, similar to WWJD. This jury will more than likely take note and ALSO be offended.

What Garagos SHOULD be doing is having the family go up there and directly ask the jury, "Please don't kill our brother/cousin/son." They haven't done this.

Lacy's mom's testimony hangs over the courtroom still. Clearly, Garagos chose another losing strategy -- to try to get enough witnesses to put a lot of time between Sharon Laroach and when the deliberations start.

[DoughtyOne]

Wow. Just another day of rest and recreation hugh.

I'd be pretty darned somber if it were me. I wonder if perhaps this is revealatory of some issues the family had, that lead Scott down this road.

Responsibility doesn't seem to run deep in that group.

[DoughtyOne]

It makes sense and we each have to do what is in our hearts.

I love my children. I love my family members. It would sadden me greatly if any of them faced what Scott does, but Scott placed himself in this situation. His act of ignoring Lacy's pleas would leave me incapable of pleading for him.

I raised my children to have good values. When they became adults, they took over the responsibility for their own actions. They will rise or fall on their own merits.

I simply could not defend them in this situation. I would continue to love them. I would try to support them by keeping in contact, but I would not plead for their lives if convicted of this type of crime.

Now, if I thought there were any chance that they were not guilty, of course I'd do my best to see them defended and cleared.

Is there a doubt in anyone's mind about Scott with regard to Lacy? Sadly, no there isn't. This young man that had so much going for him, killed it all himself. His crime had many repercussions. His death will be the last. When he is gone, the issue will be laid to rest. Him living after what he has done, is a miscarriage of justice IMO.

If he were a son of mine, I would feel the same way. It would cause me a lot of grief, but I would feel the same way.

[Types_with_Fist]

...:-) Thanks. I love this place. I ask and I receive.

The first description (sociopath) seems a bit closer. There was one symptom I've also heard associated with being a "sociopath"... the mimicking of human emotions. This is because they seem to have no way of expressing them on their own. This would go toward a lack of empathy for others and is also in line with what little emotion Peterson has attempted to display, like his crying episode with Diane Sawyer.

At any rate, thanks for the info!

[texasbluebell]

Yes, agree with your comments.

[onyx]

ROTFLOL!

[texasbluebell]

Hehe.

[PleaseNoMore]

I didn't hear the WWSD comment or read it anywhere. I do believe that it is hard on the familes of the victims AND the perpetrators of crimes. As the family member of one murdered I understand the Rocha's feelings to a degree. Having seen the heartache of the mother of the man who murdered her upon his death sentence I feel for the "other" family as well.

[eluminate]

I still say he will get the verdict overturned. Too much coincedense in favor of the prosecution especially the way the judge conducted himself in his disision making. You just watch and see.

And I still don't believe he did it. But even if he did he should be able to get away with it due to the circumstances of the way jurors conducted themselves having & testing out theories which were not presented.

[Types_with_Fist]

But even if he did he should be able to get away with it...

Lord have mercy!

[eluminate]

yes I stick by that. Justice requires order and lawful process of delibiration with no fantasy land hypothesis being acted out.

[freedumb2003]

KFI has had a reporter covering it closely -- she reported on the comment and even talked with some legal experts about it after yesterday's testimony.

I am sorry about your loss -- I am sure this is painful for you. MUI Roche was very, very compelling -- even hardened court reporters teared up and at least 6 jury members openly wept.

[fiesti]

"But even if he did he should be able to get away with it "

OMG this is the sickest statement I have heard

[A CA Guy]

Many Saints died young and horribly.

[A CA Guy]

True, who the heck do they think he is, OJ?

[blondee123]

Thanks, that picture creeps me out, I just DO NOT get these people! Are they in Neverland with M.J.??????

[1FASTGLOCK45]

THey aren't with MJ right now, MJs little house of touchy feely has been raided again this friday by the cops looking for more evidence.

[texasbluebell]

In scotts case there was innuendo and the physical evidence didnt exist.

The physical evidence does exist. Why was there a pliers on the boat, with one of Laci's hairs stuck in it? She was never in that boat. She didn't know he had bought it, only 10 days before she died. In any case, she was prone to sea-sickness and had no interest in boating.

Let's not forget the little clue that her body and her son's body washed up right in the area where he went fishing when he dumped Laci overboard.

Where are the missing cement anchors? Scott poured cement to make home-made anchors, which he later could not account for.

His behavior after Laci disappeared points to his guilt, to his knowledge that she was not coming back. He tried to put their house on the market 10 days after she disappeared, he got rid of her belongings, dumping them on the curb for garbage pickup, he got rid of her cats, he sold her car which she loved less than a month after she was gone. He threw away their wedding photo album, it was found in a trash can in his storage locker. This all points to his knowledge that she was not alive.

This is not innuendo. What you call innuendo is all circumstantial evidence which points to the husband in this case. Have you not learned that circumstantial evidence is much more trustworthy that eyewitness accounts?

Many many crimes are committed without any eyewitnesses, and people are convicted everyday this way.

This creep knows full-well that he killed his young family, and I hope he has many years to stew about it, before he meets his Maker.

[RGSpincich]

But even if he did he should be able to get away with it due to the circumstances of the way jurors conducted themselves having & testing out theories which were not presented.

Such as?