|
|
03/14/10
|
|||||||||||||||
|
|
June 03,
2004
The case being presented by the Stanislaus County, California District Attorney to a jury in Redwood City is based upon nothing more than Scott Peterson’s behavior after Peterson’s wife, Laci, went missing – as if a person’s initial reaction and subsequent behavior can be accurately used to determine a person’s guilt or innocence of a murder.
Outside of Peterson’s alleged “suspicious” behavior, here is what the Prosecution’s case lacks:
1: An absence of a murder scene. No sign of struggle, no blood, no body fluids, nothing. Laci just disappeared.
2: No cause of death. The prosecution can prove only that Laci Peterson and her unborn son are deceased. They don’t know how Laci died, whether by the hand of another, or by natural causes.
3: No murder weapon.
4: No witnesses who saw Peterson move Laci’s body. Some witnesses will say they saw Peterson move something large, but they cannot testify what it was, and Peterson says it was umbrellas he moved to his warehouse.
No witnesses who saw Peterson dump Laci’s body into San Francisco Bay. No witnesses, period. During the entire time Peterson drove from Modesto, California to the Berkeley Marina and back, 160 miles, not one witness in the entire, highly populated Bay Area remembered seeing Peterson with his truck and boat involved in anything.
5: No confession by Peterson.
6: No evidence that Laci’s body was ever in the truck or the boat Peterson went fishing in that day. A single hair found on fishing pliers in the boat “might” belong to Laci, but since Peterson lived with Laci, her hair strands would be expected to be found on anything Peterson frequented, as well as in his truck and his clothing. Some evidence!
7: No evidence whatsoever that Laci’s death was caused or even contributed to by Scott Peterson.
Now here’s the Prosecution’s case:
1: Scott told differing stories about where he was the day Laci disappeared.
2: Scott was having an affair with Amber Frye.
3: Scott had changed his appearance, moved near the Mexican border, had $15,000.00 in his possession when arrested, and had his brother’s driver’s license in his possession.
4: Scott acted guilty, as if he knew Laci wasn’t coming home. He sold her car.
5: Scott drove to the Berkeley Marina several times after Laci disappeared.
How the Prosecution in this case plans to make the weakest capital murder case in history last 5 months is beyond me. They don’t have any scientific forensic evidence to bore the jury with like the Prosecution did in the OJ Simpson trial. They don’t have a bloody scene to move the jury to convict on pure revulsion, like the prosecution did when Sam Shepard was wrongly convicted of killing his wife back in the 50s in Ohio. They don’t have Jack, except a tedious parade of witnesses who are going to get on the stand, stamp their little feet and emphatically insist Scott Peterson killed his wife and unborn baby because he just acted guilty – and not a scintilla of anything more substantial than that.
I’m not taking a position on whether I think Peterson is guilty. I really don’t know, so I can’t. Bill O’Reilly announced to his audience on Fox News this evening, the very first day the trial began, that he thinks Peterson is guilty, thus cementing once and for all in my mind that Bill O’Reilly is a complete idiot.
No, it’s not a question of whether I think Peterson is guilty of killing Laci and son Connor, it is the fact that this case is so weak that no responsible American juror would vote to convict Peterson and sentence him to death on evidence this flimsy.
As I’ve written previously regarding this case, reasonable doubt inexorably corrupted the Prosecution’s case when it was publicly revealed that Scott Peterson had gone boating/fishing off the Berkeley Marina the day Laci went missing, and weeks before Laci and Connor’s bodies washed ashore several miles away.
If that fact had not been publicly revealed, I’d have a hard time seeing Peterson as innocent. But with that information widely reported, anyone who held Laci or her body knew right where to dump her body when things calmed down, and preferably at night or in stormy weather.
That aspect of this case blew the doors wide open for reasonable doubt, and particularly in view of the fact no evidence of a crime scene exists, and no other evidence of Scott Peterson’s involvement in Laci’s death or the disposition of her body has been found. Nothing.
On the other hand, Laci’s dog was found wandering with its leash attached. One witness will testify she saw Laci walking her dog, and another witness claims he saw Laci with two suspicious men.
If there ever was a case where a man could be wrongly convicted for murder, this is it, and this is how it happens.
People and irresponsible jurors of a like-mind with Bill O’Reilly will insist it must be Peterson to the exclusion of all others, just like the jurors did in the Sam Shepard case, and even though they could not possibly come to that conclusion based on the evidence presented.
It will be interesting, and possibly horrifying, to see how this case plays out. Carl F.
Worden
|
Archives The Iraq Model For Retaking America Homeowners: Ever Heard Of A C.L.U.E Report? The Strange Case Of Casey Nethercott The Chicken Chronicles - Whatever Happened To The U. S.? Another Huge Medical Marijuana Win The Chicken Chronicles, Part II The Truth About The Bush Tax Cuts Complete Archives for Carl F. Worden
| |||||||||||||
 |
Submit
Feedback
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
