Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This makes me think less of the Innocence Project rather than think better of Scott Peterson. I grew up very close to where the murder happened and there was no question—he’s guilty.

Yes, me too. I worked with a lawyer who received a lot of fame for representing a death row inmate. She sincerely believed he was innocent and he maintained his innocence vehemently. He was actually executed still maintaining his innocence and she was there with him. Years later when DNA testing developed, she had the samples tested to clear his name. He was absolutely guilty. And was utterly convincing in insisting he was innocent. So even the lawyers that are really good at this stuff can get hoodwinked.

That would've made a great documentary.

Anonymous wrote:Not only did he tell his ap that his wife was dead BEFORE his disappearance, he was on the phone with Amber DURING A LACI VIGIL. An innocent person would be frantic, at least for their unborn child if they no longer loved their MISSING spouse.

I don’t think that proves anything other than he was a jerk. Or a sex addict or both?

I bet there are plenty of guys who tell aps that their wife is dead. I personally couldn’t say it about my spouse but some people don’t care. 🤷‍♀️

And he was already having multiple affairs. He didn’t need his wife out of the way to have affairs. And let’s say they got divorced - he would have been shacked up with someone new and a string of new aps quickly

Anonymous wrote:This makes me think less of the Innocence Project rather than think better of Scott Peterson. I grew up very close to where the murder happened and there was no question—he’s guilty.

Yes, me too. I worked with a lawyer who received a lot of fame for representing a death row inmate. She sincerely believed he was innocent and he maintained his innocence vehemently. He was actually executed still maintaining his innocence and she was there with him. Years later when DNA testing developed, she had the samples tested to clear his name. He was absolutely guilty. And was utterly convincing in insisting he was innocent. So even the lawyers that are really good at this stuff can get hoodwinked.

Well this is one way to ruin the integrity of the Innocence Project.

Like getting OJ off. Technically, they were right. The cops were idiots and racist pieces of trash who effed things up. But OJ also killed two people.

Well... There was the life insurance policy for Laci he had taken out on her. $250,000. That could be a motive for some people. Not DCUM though. $250k is pocket money.

Anonymous wrote:Not only did he tell his ap that his wife was dead BEFORE his disappearance, he was on the phone with Amber DURING A LACI VIGIL. An innocent person would be frantic, at least for their unborn child if they no longer loved their MISSING spouse.

I more took this as Peterson trying to legitimize his affair with Amber. In other words, "don't you feel bad for me, my wife passed away this year...therefore I'm not a cheater" and he told her long before Laci actually was killed. Not saying he didn't do it, just correcting what I believe is an error in the way you interpreted the information.

"In January, it was revealed he'd had two other such affairs before the one with Amber. Amber also claimed that Scott had told her on Dec. 9, weeks before Laci's disappearance, that those would be his first Christmas without his wife who had died that year" https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2024/01/19/scott-laci-peterson-case-timeline/72281058007/#

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This makes me think less of the Innocence Project rather than think better of Scott Peterson. I grew up very close to where the murder happened and there was no question—he’s guilty.

Yup.

+1000
He told his girlfriend she died BEFORE she died. The concrete on the boat, he ran with cash and dyed his hair. Come on.

Exactly

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This makes me think less of the Innocence Project rather than think better of Scott Peterson. I grew up very close to where the murder happened and there was no question—he’s guilty.

Questioning the Innocence Project exposes you for the racist you obviously are.

Took you longer to cry racism than usual. I thought we’d escaped you in this thread. Welcome!

I’d bet $50 the person you’re responding to is actually on the other side of the issue and trying to stir things up. I’m the person he’s responding to and I’ve been an Innocence Project supporter for years. There are plenty of people being wrongfully convicted who deserve attention. Those people are not the Scott Petersons of the world. This move reflects poorly on the IP.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are so many better humans than Peterson.

Why would they do this they have so little funding?

Perhaps a large donation was made conditional.

I was wondering if this was the case.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I guess anything is possible but why, if Scott is innocent, did he dye his hair and appear to be fleeing to Mexico with $10,000 in cash?

"Scott Peterson was sporting a different hair color, a new beard, and toting $10,000 in cash and someone else's identification when he was arrested about 30 miles from the Mexican border on suspicion of killing his wife, Laci, reports say."
https://abcnews.go.com/Primetime/story?id=131979&page=1

If I remember correctly, the prevailing opinion was that he was guilty. It was a very public case. I could see an innocent person running in that situation. He had had an affair, which made him look guilty, even though all the evidence against him was circumstantial.

Yeah, this sums it up. It was all circumstantial, which is often enough to convict and was in this instance. I wonder what the defense will be or what new evidence was uncovered. The only somewhat plausible defense from my recollection was that there were a history of recent break-ins in the neighborhood around the time of her murder and these were committed by two really sketchy guys. Something to that effect.

Most evidence in a murder case is "circumstantial." Very difficult to get direct evidence.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This makes me think less of the Innocence Project rather than think better of Scott Peterson. I grew up very close to where the murder happened and there was no question—he’s guilty.

Questioning the Innocence Project exposes you for the racist you obviously are.

Took you longer to cry racism than usual. I thought we’d escaped you in this thread. Welcome!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who could possibly believe this?

"Scott Peterson filing says Laci witnessed a crime and was killed to “shut her up,” and those responsible framed her husband."

Trying to link this to her witnessing a burglary across the street is insane. Petty burglars are going to murder a near-term pregnant woman? The only one with a plausible, concrete motive was Scott.

This.

Can someone who remembers the documentary chime in? Did one of the burglars turn out to have murdered someone else? There was some particular evidence that came up.

I think he’s a guilty scumbag but everyone who is saying it’s obvious because he had an affair is crazy. I have a weird job where I work closely with a lot of men and get to/have to listen to them talk to each other like I’m not even there. A lot of them cheat on their pregnant wives. Otherwise nice men. Good dads. Not every man cheats but a lot of them do.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This makes me think less of the Innocence Project rather than think better of Scott Peterson. I grew up very close to where the murder happened and there was no question—he’s guilty.

Yup.

+1000
He told his girlfriend she died BEFORE she died. The concrete on the boat, he ran with cash and dyed his hair. Come on.

So they're going to try and get him off on a "technicality" instead of the fact he killed them?