Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The public opinion and even the police opinion is driven by the media unfortunately. People wanted to take the words of Amber very seriously as if she’s some moral paragon of virtue. She saw no problem with being a mistress to a married man with a pregnant wife at home

That’s an awful thing to say. Amber Frey didn’t know he was married, she thought he was widowed. As soon as she learned the truth, she contacted the police and started recording Scott and cooperating with them fully. She did absolutely nothing wrong and has been attacked relentlessly for years.

That said, Scott’s cold, deceptive character as demonstrated on those tapes is likely why he was convicted. The jury hated him. We all hate him. He’s an awful person. I don’t know whether he’s guilty. I think I would vote to acquit because the prosecution proved he was a terrible person: a liar, a cheater, indifferent to Laci and Conner’s fate. But I don’t think the evidence proves that Scott killed Laci.

I’m always suspicious when law enforcement resists DNA testing. It’s so much more advanced than it was at the time of the murder. If they really firmly believe Scott did it, they should want those results.

A lot of the arguments in this thread show how personality based this conviction was. For example, if you need to hire an expensive attorney you might be looking at what you could sell. That Scott wanted to sell Laci’s car again demonstrates what a pig he is, but it’s not evidence of murder.

What about him fleeing toward Mexico? Was he just in the mood for a vacation?
I don't think so. The fact that he dyed his hair blond and fled toward Mexico supports a consciousness of guilt. If he were innocent, he would have been in Modesto supporting the investigation. But he's an arrogant prick who always has his nose in the air, even after 20 years in the slammer. He's an absolute pig, and he should rot in jail.

NP. I think he did it. But I get why he has blonde hair. He was probably getting recognized everywhere he went and just probably wanted to get by unnoticed. He also spent a lot of time in San Diego with a sibling. So again, the fact that he was in San Diego was actually pretty normal for him at that point.

There are enough other things that point to him being guilty, no need to grasp at straws.

Dying his hair, using someone elses ID, carrying $15k in cash along with a giant bag of viagra while fleeing to mexico is not "grasping at straws".

What is the town of Modesto like?

Anonymous wrote:He and Chris Watts remind me so much of each other.

Their families have a lot of similarities, too. Both choose not to believe the truth about what they did.

Anonymous wrote:What a dumbass. He is clearly a psycho but not a smart one.

+1. He watched too many episodes of Criminal Minds and thought he could write his own script. He could have just divorced Laci and paid child support. His kid would have been an adult by now. Moron x 1,000 000.

Anonymous wrote:The public opinion and even the police opinion is driven by the media unfortunately. People wanted to take the words of Amber very seriously as if she’s some moral paragon of virtue. She saw no problem with being a mistress to a married man with a pregnant wife at home

I see no reason to drag Amber through the mud. She didn't know she was a mistress. She thought he was her boyfriend. He told her that he lost his wife and this would be the first Christmas without her, and that was before she was dead.

And when she did know who he was because of all the media coverage, she went to the police and the audio recordings she helped to facilitate are likely a large part of why he is in prison today.

Anonymous wrote:The public opinion and even the police opinion is driven by the media unfortunately. People wanted to take the words of Amber very seriously as if she’s some moral paragon of virtue. She saw no problem with being a mistress to a married man with a pregnant wife at home

She didnt know he was married. He told her his wife was dead.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The public opinion and even the police opinion is driven by the media unfortunately. People wanted to take the words of Amber very seriously as if she’s some moral paragon of virtue. She saw no problem with being a mistress to a married man with a pregnant wife at home

That’s an awful thing to say. Amber Frey didn’t know he was married, she thought he was widowed. As soon as she learned the truth, she contacted the police and started recording Scott and cooperating with them fully. She did absolutely nothing wrong and has been attacked relentlessly for years.

That said, Scott’s cold, deceptive character as demonstrated on those tapes is likely why he was convicted. The jury hated him. We all hate him. He’s an awful person. I don’t know whether he’s guilty. I think I would vote to acquit because the prosecution proved he was a terrible person: a liar, a cheater, indifferent to Laci and Conner’s fate. But I don’t think the evidence proves that Scott killed Laci.

I’m always suspicious when law enforcement resists DNA testing. It’s so much more advanced than it was at the time of the murder. If they really firmly believe Scott did it, they should want those results.

A lot of the arguments in this thread show how personality based this conviction was. For example, if you need to hire an expensive attorney you might be looking at what you could sell. That Scott wanted to sell Laci’s car again demonstrates what a pig he is, but it’s not evidence of murder.

What about him fleeing toward Mexico? Was he just in the mood for a vacation?
I don't think so. The fact that he dyed his hair blond and fled toward Mexico supports a consciousness of guilt. If he were innocent, he would have been in Modesto supporting the investigation. But he's an arrogant prick who always has his nose in the air, even after 20 years in the slammer. He's an absolute pig, and he should rot in jail.

NP. I think he did it. But I get why he has blonde hair. He was probably getting recognized everywhere he went and just probably wanted to get by unnoticed. He also spent a lot of time in San Diego with a sibling. So again, the fact that he was in San Diego was actually pretty normal for him at that point.

There are enough other things that point to him being guilty, no need to grasp at straws.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The public opinion and even the police opinion is driven by the media unfortunately. People wanted to take the words of Amber very seriously as if she’s some moral paragon of virtue. She saw no problem with being a mistress to a married man with a pregnant wife at home

That’s an awful thing to say. Amber Frey didn’t know he was married, she thought he was widowed. As soon as she learned the truth, she contacted the police and started recording Scott and cooperating with them fully. She did absolutely nothing wrong and has been attacked relentlessly for years.

That said, Scott’s cold, deceptive character as demonstrated on those tapes is likely why he was convicted. The jury hated him. We all hate him. He’s an awful person. I don’t know whether he’s guilty. I think I would vote to acquit because the prosecution proved he was a terrible person: a liar, a cheater, indifferent to Laci and Conner’s fate. But I don’t think the evidence proves that Scott killed Laci.

I’m always suspicious when law enforcement resists DNA testing. It’s so much more advanced than it was at the time of the murder. If they really firmly believe Scott did it, they should want those results.

A lot of the arguments in this thread show how personality based this conviction was. For example, if you need to hire an expensive attorney you might be looking at what you could sell. That Scott wanted to sell Laci’s car again demonstrates what a pig he is, but it’s not evidence of murder.

What about him fleeing toward Mexico? Was he just in the mood for a vacation?
I don't think so. The fact that he dyed his hair blond and fled toward Mexico supports a consciousness of guilt. If he were innocent, he would have been in Modesto supporting the investigation. But he's an arrogant prick who always has his nose in the air, even after 20 years in the slammer. He's an absolute pig, and he should rot in jail.

Anonymous wrote:The public opinion and even the police opinion is driven by the media unfortunately. People wanted to take the words of Amber very seriously as if she’s some moral paragon of virtue. She saw no problem with being a mistress to a married man with a pregnant wife at home

His damning, cold-blooded words are on tape. The Scott defenders have a collective screw loose.

Anonymous wrote:The public opinion and even the police opinion is driven by the media unfortunately. People wanted to take the words of Amber very seriously as if she’s some moral paragon of virtue. She saw no problem with being a mistress to a married man with a pregnant wife at home

That’s an awful thing to say. Amber Frey didn’t know he was married, she thought he was widowed. As soon as she learned the truth, she contacted the police and started recording Scott and cooperating with them fully. She did absolutely nothing wrong and has been attacked relentlessly for years.

That said, Scott’s cold, deceptive character as demonstrated on those tapes is likely why he was convicted. The jury hated him. We all hate him. He’s an awful person. I don’t know whether he’s guilty. I think I would vote to acquit because the prosecution proved he was a terrible person: a liar, a cheater, indifferent to Laci and Conner’s fate. But I don’t think the evidence proves that Scott killed Laci.

I’m always suspicious when law enforcement resists DNA testing. It’s so much more advanced than it was at the time of the murder. If they really firmly believe Scott did it, they should want those results.

A lot of the arguments in this thread show how personality based this conviction was. For example, if you need to hire an expensive attorney you might be looking at what you could sell. That Scott wanted to sell Laci’s car again demonstrates what a pig he is, but it’s not evidence of murder.

I watched the series.

The only thing that gave me pause at all was the robbery across the street. The police should have spent more time on that. Their timeline seemed completely suspicious given that there would have been a huge police presence and media coverage all around the home on the day they say it occurred. There is no way burglars would do that. The police didn’t seem to do a thorough job there.

I do think he’s guilty though. Who takes some crappy boat out by himself Christmas Eve all day when you have a pregnant wife at home? That’s just not normal behavior. And his wife’s body just so happens to wash up there? He had homemade anchors? Super sketchy.

Also he claimed it was too cold for him to play golf like he said he was going to do. If it’s too cold for golf, it’s definitely too cold to go out on a boat.

Also, he clearly was not a neat freak, so why did he wash his clothes as soon as he got home?

Also, all of his calls to Amber after Laci’s death? Even a man cheating on his wife wouldn’t continue to call after all that happened. That was just weird. I’m so glad they got all that on tape. Memories fade, but those tapes are forever.

I just wished the detectives tied up the loose ends with the robbery better.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The guy is clearly guilty. I’m shocked that anyone with a functioning brain could think otherwise.

No forensic DNA tied him to the death. It’s all circumstantial evidence like what he told his girlfriend about the relationship being over (most cheaters say that ) and going fishing.

That doesn’t mean he killed his wife.

They found her hair in a pair of pliers on his boat that he used to dump her body.

Is DNA evidence the only way to prove a murder?

Hair is found anywhere. That’s not proof of murder. Laci had thick head of long curly hair. I’m sure her hair follicles shed everywhere.



Where is the blood evidence? Laci was practically decapitated. Her body was dismembered. Where were the scratches and bruises on his arm from Laci fighting back during the strangulation? Where’s the evidence from Laci’s mop that he used in the house to clean up? What about the duct tape on her mouth? No evidence there either. No blood on the boat.

Do you really think he’d do all that especially on Christmas Eve when everyone was at home and had family over? He just dismembered a body or carried it out whole into his car on Christmas morning and went fishing to dump the body? Dog apparently doesn’t say a thing during all this dismemberment. He calls Lacis family to ask where she is in the afternoon. Why would he want to alarm them that she’s missing and not home? That gives him away if he’s the killer right?

Hadn’t he bleached the entire kitchen right after she disappeared? If I remember correctly…. I haven’t watched any recent docs but followed the case for a while.

No. She was the one cleaning the kitchen with a mop. If the crime was strangulation, I can see how it could be possible Scott did it but it’s the dismemberment that is the issue here.

Bleach or the mop would be bloodstained and soaked with dna or blood and First off, that’s something only a true psychopath can do and he’d need a saw or something to do that. His boat and car was clean and the mop that Laci used was there and not blood soaked.


To me, it’s possible he was framed by police and media all because he was a cheater and not much else. Laci was last seen walking alone outside in the neighborhood. He should’ve walked with her.

That was his biggest mistake

Why do you think she was dismembered? She was strangled. The body was disposed in the water. The body decomposed. That’s it.

The murder of Laci Peterson on A&E and YouTube is a great watch. Breaks down the entire case via timeline

He and Chris Watts remind me so much of each other.

The public opinion and even the police opinion is driven by the media unfortunately. People wanted to take the words of Amber very seriously as if she’s some moral paragon of virtue. She saw no problem with being a mistress to a married man with a pregnant wife at home