711 Date: 2004-02-25 21:49:27
Scott is innocent ( no email / no homepage) wrote:

nsnews.tripod.com/innocent.htm

710 Date: 2004-02-25 21:47:52
Tom Wilkinson ( tom5515@yahoo.com / no homepage) wrote:

Modesto police detective Al Brocchini called off a search even though a bloodhound named Merlin appeared to be following Laci Peterson’s scent, the dog’s handler testified Tuesday. That is very strange. This lapse has made it clear that the police had no interest to verify or to dispute Scott's claim that Laci was walking her dog in the park, and that is a consistent lapse. Is it any wonder that the police did not follow up, on Vivian Mitchell's claim that Laci was walking her dog? These lapses are not, by any stretch of the imagination, excusable, and they make the prosecutor's dog handlers testimony, relatively useless, except for the fact that this testimony exposes an incompetent investigation.

709 Date: 2004-02-25 21:13:24
Jeremy Russell ( no email / no homepage) wrote:

It was getting late on Dec. 26, 2002 - two days after a pregnant Laci Peterson was reported missing.

“In spite of the fact a missing woman is out there whose scent is out there, Brocchini made the decision not to track it?” defense attorney Pat Harris asked.

“Yes,” said Cindee Valentin, a volunteer dog handler with the Contra Costa County Sheriff’s Department.

Valentin maintained that the her assessment that Laci Peteson left in a vehicle was accurate.

“Looking at the entire trail,” Harris asked, “Do you still think this was the scent of Laci Peterson in a vehicle?”

“Yes I do,” Valentin said.

But she said police never instructed her to have her dog search in East La Loma Park, where Scott Peterson told police his wife may have walked their dog.

Valentin also said it was her impression from talking to police on Dec. 26 they were looking at Scott Peterson and not trying to find his wife.

Sounds like the prosecutor's own witness proves that Laci was kidnapped and that Scott did not murder her, in their own home.

708 Date: 2004-02-25 14:06:59
Mike ( no email / no homepage) wrote:

Not quite Tom. The "investigative developments" were well reported in the media. The police, Bill Garcia and Ava Frey were trying to "cement" the case against Scott Peterson, and when they failed to implicate Scott, they said "we are not going to disclose our investigative developments." The police obviously think they have a license to bury their failures. If they don't do that, they cannot justify the arrest of Scott Peterson.

707 Date: 2004-02-25 13:10:32
Tom Wilkinson ( tom5515@yahoo.com / no homepage) wrote:

How did the police know that Laci was dead when she was spotted in Longview Washington?

The fact that the gun-toting District Attorney intimidates witnesses is absolutely clear, but where is the proof that Laci was dead?

Scott Peterson is entitled to receive ALL the evidence, the trial is on. It was well promoted in the media that the police refused to reveal the investigative developments that caused them to clasify Laci's death a homicide and there is absolutely no justification for withholding this information at this point in time.

706 Date: 2004-02-25 02:11:08
Joe Sneider ( no email / no homepage) wrote:

The police have been acting like Laci was murdered on December 23rd, and then she is spotted walking her dog.

And then she was spotted in Longview Washington, by at least 2 independent witnesses.

And then they claimed that Laci was dead, but they refused to disclose how they knew [only the murderer would know that Laci was dead, without providing proof].

In the meantime, Scott Peterson was under 24/7 surveillance. He is the only one who had absolutely nothing to do with the disappearance of Laci Peterson, because all of his time has been fully accounted by the incompetent idiots who were tailing him.

Having been under surveillance since December 25, 2002, Scott Peterson has proved to be so absolutely innocent, that this prosecution cannot even rely on the old "jailhouse snitch" tactics, to frame Scott Peterson. Remember the hilarious effort to claim that Scott hired neo-Nazis to murder Laci. They tried to convert allegations that Scott visited strip clubs into a murder-for-hire plot.

The obsession to fry Scott is understandable. Scott Peterson can sue the MORONS who are responsible for the death of Laci Peterson, right out of their miserable existence.

The police classified Laci's death a homicide based on investigative developments they refused to reveal. It's time for the morons to expose all the creeps who are trying to cover up the truth about the murder of Laci Peterson. There is no more reason to cover for the creeps who convinced the police that Laci was dead. Why was Ava Frey, Amber's sister and Garcia, a creepy Private Investigator, looking for Laci's corpse when there was no proof that she was dead? Are they accomplices, are they hired guns, or are they just weird?

705 Date: 2004-02-25 00:02:18
God Bless Laci ! ( no email / no homepage) wrote:

lacipeterson.freewebspace.com/angel.htm

704 Date: 2004-02-24 22:35:27
Mike ( no email / no homepage) wrote:

Oh, that Vivian Mitchell was a nasty liar. She killed Laci !

703 Date: 2004-02-24 21:42:58
Joe Sneider ( no email / no homepage) wrote:

Prosecutors say that Scott lied about his pregnant wife continuing to walk the dog into her third trimester. Hey, no wonder they murdered Vivian Mitchell.

www.geocities.com/botenth/murder.htm

702 Date: 2004-02-24 19:16:11
Tom Wilkinson ( tom5515@yahoo.com / no homepage) wrote:

Any journalist or legal expert who analyzes the bogus case against Scott Peterson clearly understands the fact that Scott Peterson is not guilty. In fact, Scott Peterson is the only person who has been absolutely cleared by all the scrutiny.