What is the perfect alibi --I went Fishing or I was Golfing?
602 Date: 2003-11-10 02:43:32
Lynne Foster ( no email / no homepage) wrote:
The fact that Scott believed that it was too cold to go golfing proves that Scott Peterson did not murder Laci. If Scott had murdered Laci and wanted to establish the perfect alibi, he would have gone golfing. The suggestion that he would establish a fishing alibi using a boat that nobody had heard about is too stupid to take seriously.
601 Date: 2003-11-10 02:21:59
Jack Stewart ( no email / no homepage) wrote:
It is amazing how stupid people are so obsessive about calling Scott a liar that they misrepresent EVERYTHING he says. For example, when Scott says that it was too cold to go golfing, MORONS claim that he is an idiotic liar, because it was colder by the sea where he was boating.
Golf, because of the movements of swinging the club, etc., does not allow you to dress too warmly without affecting your game. Fishing allows you to wear as many clothes as you like, without violating the dress code on the golf course.
The morons who are currently calling Scott Peterson a liar are too stupid for simple reasoning.
600 Date: 2003-11-09 21:06:25
This was reported, January 21, 2003. ( no email / no homepage) wrote:
On Monday, police revealed that the Peterson home was burglarized while Scott was in Southern California. Peterson reported the break-in Sunday night. Police said burglars entered the home through a window sometime between Thursday and Sunday.
"Detectives don't believe the burglary is connected to the Peterson case," said Detective Doug Ridenour, spokesman for the Modesto Police Department.
How do the Detectives know that this burglary was not connected to the disappearance of Laci? Why didn't they get Laci's sister to go through the house, after the burglary?
One more thing. I agree with many of you, this parody of the National Enquirer is an awesome website:
599 Date: 2003-11-09 17:03:49
Lynne Foster ( no email / no homepage) wrote:
Not strange at all. The DA is desperate to prove that Laci was murdered before the 24th, and stories about the tan pants are predictable leaks. It's like the magic bullet theory, if you promote one huge lie, you can discredit the entire truth.
598 Date: 2003-11-09 13:05:39
Gayle Lewis ( no email / no homepage) wrote:
If there's no blood on those tan pants, I'd have to agree with David Sween. At this point in time, it is safe to assume that whoever did this horrible deed, is manipulating this investigation. Like he says, why can't anybody find any "real" evidence, like Laci's head?
This media circus about what Laci wore when she disappeared is nauseating. I mean, that should have been resolved a long time ago, if anybody was in fact concerned about rescuing Laci Peterson. Now that she is dead, everybody is into smelling chlorine and into discovering cement powder and pliers in Scott Peterson's boat. What's next, a strand of tan colored material?
We know what Laci was wearing, it was clearly reported by multiple sources, on the day that she vanished without a trace, until the murderers were so frustrated by the failure to implicate Scott, that they did the unthinkable.
597 Date: 2003-11-09 12:45:00
Very Strange. ( no email / no homepage) wrote:
Rita Cosby reports Laci found in her clothes from night before(Dec.23rd)...tan pants.
Murderers do not lie in a manner that exposes their crimes. Oh yes, I forgot, Scott is supposed to be an arrogant, evil genius, and we are supposed to applaud the brilliant investigators who exposed him -Rita Cosby and Nancy Grace?
Scott did not hire all the people who spotted Laci, to lie about what she was wearing on the day she was kidnapped. If Laci was in fact wearing tan pants, this is the mother of all frame-ups.
596 Date: 2003-11-08 16:51:30
Is Amber Frey afraid to testify? ( no email / no homepage) wrote:
595 Date: 2003-11-08 15:14:45
David Sween ( sween@mail.com / no homepage) wrote:
Law enforcement has never demonstrated the need to investigate Scott Peterson. When LE found a loaded semi-automatic in Scott's truck, they didn't even test his hands for gun powder residue. Actually, that isn't exactly true. The Cross-Examination of Detective Brocchini is more specific:
Q. Now, and it was because of your having found the pistol that you were interested in doing the GSR test, right?
A. Yes.
Q. And GSR is gunshot residue test, right?
A. Yes.
Q. And Mr. Peterson presented his hand or hands for you to make those kind of swabs, whatever you do to do a GSR test, right?
A. Yes.
Q. And so you did that test?
A. I did.
Q. And so you collected some kind of swabs?
A. Yes.
Q. And what did you do with those after that?
A. I booked them into evidence.
Q. Was anything ever done with them?
A. No.
Q. So they were never tested?
A. Not to my knowledge, unless they're done and I didn't know about it.
This is very strange testimony. A cynic would have to say the tests were done, they were negative, and so they 'lost' them.
Somebody who is more analytical would say that if Scott had shot Laci, the police would have called it a 'hard kill'. A realist would have to conclude that the tests were done, they were negative, and the police turned their attention to 'soft kill' speculation.
It is absolutely ludicrous to suggest that Scott Peterson murdered his wife, given the fact that Detective Brocchini was not even concerned enough to prove or to disprove the claim that Scott Peterson shot Laci. Detective Brocchini is either incompetent, corrupt or he does not care to investigate the murder of Laci Peterson.
594 Date: 2003-11-08 14:30:58
Hannah Harper ( no email / no homepage) wrote:
Slow down there sister, you're giving us whores a bad name. We have hearts too, ya know, or didn't you think we were smart enough to surf. If my john had lost his wife, I would stand by his side until we found out what happened to his poor little woman. If we were all into this blackmail crap, we would be out of business. I am an uncertified, proud member of the oldest profession, Amber Frey IS NOT a whore. Blackmailer, okay, but puhleeze DO NOT call Amber Frey a whore. I do not tape my men, I just @#%$ them.
593 Date: 2003-11-08 13:56:39
Gayle Lewis ( no email / no homepage) wrote:
The police are destroying their credibility when they use Amber Frey. Amber had another relationship with another married man, the wife was pregnant and she taped his phone calls....as she did with Scott on her own.
We are talking about a whore who blackmails men for a living and that is the only thing that all the "incriminating" photos where she shoves her ugly face in Scott's direction, prove. If you look at poor Scott in some of these photos, he is doing his "gentleman's" best to pull away from this aggressive whore.
If we would like to start hanging men who sleep with whores, we need to change the law first.
HAha
Scott is too stupid to take seriously. Wow the conspiracy theorists are working overtime to help out old Mark. He needs much more than this drivel people.
Sarah88
Unregistered User
(11/26/03 4:26 pm) Reply
EVERYONE!!...
CHECK OUT MY NEW THREAD "AMBER FREY IS WEIRD AND A KOOK" AND TELL ME WHAT YOU THINK!!
This is not a conspiracy theory -it's the facts !
616 Date: 2003-11-15 15:41:50
Laura Dougherty ( no email / no homepage) wrote:
Ron Frey said Amber was hurt when Peterson told her he was not going to be around for Christmas: "He told her he was going to Paris. Nobody leaves his girlfriend alone on Christmas. He told her that because of his job, he had to travel all over the country and that it was not unusual for him to be gone from home for up 30 days at time."
Scott Peterson was trying to dump the cling-on who was in fact sleeping with yet another married men, at the very same time she slept with Scott. Amber is a victim? Who did Amber really work for, since she obviously targeted married men, to earn her living?
If Scott is such an evil murderer, why did she want to spend time with him, during Christmas? Hilarious, isn't it? --a "whore" who sleeps with married men expects to spend Christmas with them?
615 Date: 2003-11-15 14:55:27
Lynne Foster ( no email / no homepage) wrote:
A detective said investigators trying to solve the mystery of Laci Peterson's disappearance believed her husband killed her and dumped her in San Francisco Bay. These same detectives evidently planted their seeds of suspicion in the National Enquirer. Strange, when even they were puzzled about how Scott Peterson could possibly jettison Laci's body without capsizing, but that did not make them abandon their erroneous beliefs. The disappearance of Laci Peterson was consequently never investigated because the police were looking for a body, when Laci was probably alive.
614 Date: 2003-11-15 13:28:53
Gayle Lewis ( no email / no homepage) wrote:
This Prosecution kills me. First, the police say that there was no salt water on Scott's boat --he didn't go fishing. When eyewitnesses disputed this lie, they said that Scott Peterson did not know what he was fishing for. Now, they say that Scott said he had gone golfing, even though Scott had a fishing license for the 24th of December.
So what is the prosecutor trying to prove here? --that Scott Peterson had a golfing alibi but he produced a Berkeley Marina receipt, so that everybody can call him a liar? Sounds like a Letterman joke.
613 Date: 2003-11-15 12:35:25
DA is right. ( no email / no homepage) wrote:
Doctor says Conner was a full term baby. It was a Double Murder. Over at Court TV., Scott's critics are saying that Scott placed a piece of tape over Laci's vagina, to prevent coffin birth. VERY SICK PEOPLE !
612 Date: 2003-11-14 21:11:59
Barb Douglas ( barbdouglas@techie.com / no homepage) wrote:
3 seperate witnesses (confirmed by police on stand) reported that 2 men were seen in the park the morning of the 24th. John and Karma Souza told detective Owen they saw a suspicious man in a puffy jacket and blue jeans who "popped out of bushes" as they jogged on a trail in East La Loma Park early that morning.
The couple reported that the men were dishevelled and scared them. The other witness, a nurse who was having a smoke break, was watching the park and saw a pregnant woman walking a Golden Retriever. The two men were close by her and the dog was barking incessantly. One man told Laci to "shut the fucken dog up!" and Laci was pulling hard on Mackenzie's leash. The nurse then went inside. 2 days later she saw the flyer of missing Laci and said, "I've seen that woman in the park." Anybody, other than Nancy Grace, believe that these creeps did not kidnap Laci Peterson on Christmas Eve?
611 Date: 2003-11-14 19:31:48
Tom Wilkinson ( tom5515@yahoo.com / no homepage) wrote:
If Nancy Grace is right about the claim that Laci disappeared in tan pants, then how did Scott know that 3 independent people would see Laci [dressed in black and white as Scott reported] and a golden retriever in the park? Is Scott Peterson clairvoyant?
610 Date: 2003-11-14 17:04:48
Laura Dougherty ( no email / no homepage) wrote:
It would be easier to believe that Scott Peterson murdered Laci if she was wearing black and white, when the body was recovered. Only the killer or killers know what Laci Peterson was wearing on the day that Laci Peterson was murdered. Scott Peterson had no idea.
609 Date: 2003-11-14 13:44:34
Richard Turpin ( no email / no homepage) wrote:
Nancy Grace claims that tan pants prove that Scott murdered Laci on December 23rd. How wonderful. Those of us who post on message boards laughed at all the suspicious leaks about the trucker eyewitness who allegedly proved that Laci Peterson was murdered on December 23rd. The story about the tan pants is more of the same. Nancy and Al have been Dis-Graced. Shame on them. They should have worried about what Laci was wearing when she disappeared because it was their duty to serve and protect the interests of Laci Peterson the way they were protected when Elizabeth Smart was kidnapped. To be sure, the demagoguery of Nancy claimed an innocent life in the Smart case as well, but what else can anybody expect from her?
608 Date: 2003-11-14 12:48:48
Gayle Lewis ( no email / no homepage) wrote:
Laci changed, after Scott left, to go fishing. She wore her tan pants because they were more comfortable. The other pregnant lady with the dog that looked like Mackenzie, wore black pants and a white top. Hey, let's all forget about real evidence and make it up as we go along, to suit our own theory. At this point, who cares what Laci was wearing when she was kidnapped, it's too late to look for her. How did she die, when did she die and who killed her?
607 Date: 2003-11-14 11:54:48
Lynne Foster ( no email / no homepage) wrote:
When you plant suspicion, you frame a suspect. When you investigate, you discover the truth. That is the difference between Al Brocchini and David Sween.
686 Date: 2004-02-11 12:02:50
David Sween ( no email / no homepage) wrote:
The death of Vivian Mitchell is as eerie as locating the headless corpse of Laci Peterson and Scott's "pristine condition" son, to implicate an innocent man.
Vivian Mitchell was a key witness because, like Scott Peterson, she told the police that Laci was wearing black pants and a white top on Christmas Eve. If Scott was the murderer, the last thing he would do is lie about the clothes that Laci wore, when he killed her.
When you dig beneath the surface, the entire case against Scott Peterson has been about using the intelligence that only the murderers would know, to implicate Scott Peterson. As long as Vivian Mitchell was alive, she was in a position to clearly and convincingly expose the preposterous, prosecution suggestion that Scott Peterson is the murderer because he lied about what Laci was wearing, on the day she disappeared. Clearly, Scott Peterson did not tell Vivian Mitchell what to tell the police and that is what you call pure evidence. When Laci walked Mackenzie, on Christmas Eve, and I use the fact that Laci's own dog confirms the suggestion, to prove the point, she wore black pants and a white top, and this simple fact was widely reported in the media. Did anybody issue an "all points bulletin" to locate a missing woman in tan pants? Vivian Mitchell would have died laughing if that had happened.
Scott Peterson had no idea what Laci wore when she magically surfaced because he did not shoot his beautiful wife in the head. My ignorant critics say that if I am so smart, why don't I find Laci's head? The answer is simple. I am not responsible for the murder of Laci Peterson and I am not the one who is exploiting the knowledge that only the murderers would know. I merely point out the fact that Laci was probably dismembered before being dumped, probably to cover up the cause of death. All the preposterous, "magic head" theories that pundits routinely manufacture are so disgusting, that I have a panic attack, every time I hear a moron advance his so called, investigative skills, to suit the "revelations" that are published in the National Enquirer.
The people who are responsible for the murder of Laci Peterson are experts at exploiting their "intelligence" and the ignorance of all the pundits, but in the final analysis, they are directly responsible for proving that Scott Peterson is absolutely innocent. We are talking about innocent beyond the shadow of any doubt, because there is no greater difference between a "slam dunk" and this transparent scam which seeks to create the false appearance that Scott Peterson is guilty. There is no greater difference between Scott Peterson and the people who kidnapped his wife, on December 24, 2003. Vivian Mitchell may be dead, but her observations are as relevant as ever.
685 Date: 2004-02-10 23:36:57
CASE CLOSED ( no email / message.alturl.com) wrote:
684 Date: 2004-02-10 23:27:38
Pam Clark ( no email / no homepage) wrote:
I know this sounds gross, but I was reading another board which suggested that Laci was buried in a shallow grave and then dumped, to implicate Scott Peterson and the argument makes a lot of sense because the evidence indicates that Laci was probably dismembered prior to going into the water.
Isn't that why her head is missing? I am not one to believe preposterous theories -the head is not there...period, and that strongly suggests that the head is probably still in the shallow grave the body was initially dumped in. If that was not the case, the head would have turned up by now.
Like the rest of you, I also think that Vivian Mitchell and Laci's dog are currently the most reliable witnesses to the fact that Laci was alive and well, on December 24, 2003.
683 Date: 2004-02-10 12:21:19
To accuse Scott, you need... ( no email / no homepage) wrote:
--A hysterical police force that refuses to return the calls of intelligent, reliable eye witnesses like Vivian Mitchell
--A hysterical DA's Office that repeatedly leaks to the National Enquirer to demonize Scott
--A gullible public that tolerates this excessive abuse
--Hysterical, neo-Nazi eye witnesses who replace independent witnesses like Vivian Mitchell because they claim that Scott Peterson is guilty
--Hysterical demagogues like Nancy Grace, who falsely claim that eye witnesses like Vivian Mitchell coached Scott Peterson's dog, to create an alibi
--The bizarre, disgusting list goes on and on.
All you need to conclusively prove that Scott Peterson was absolutely shocked when his wife was kidnapped on Christmas Eve is the ability to view the evidence without distorting it
--it's called, simple, common sense.
682 Date: 2004-02-09 18:12:52
Richard Reed ( no email / no homepage) wrote:
Mrs Mitchell was not alone. At least two other residents of the neighborhood where Laci Peterson lived also claim they saw her walking her dog between 9:45 and 10:30 a.m. on the day she vanished. These witnesses are extremely reliable and only a fool would challenge them because Laci Peterson's own dog confirmed their onservations. I agree with everybody who considers Vivian Mitchel's testimony to be conclusive.
681 Date: 2004-02-09 17:33:27
Lisa Kent ( no email / no homepage) wrote:
Bill Mitchell defends the credibility of his wife. "I really think they had a theory, and facts that don't fit the theory sometimes don't impress others,'' Bill Mitchell, 84, said in a telephone interview from his Modesto home. "We're both long in years, but she was a good observer, and she was positive up to last Sunday when she could still talk."
Vivian Mitchell's account would have corroborated Scott Peterson's account of what happened Christmas Eve morning. Geragos has suggested that Laci Peterson was abducted by two men while walking her dog in a nearby park.
Bill Mitchell said that although he and his wife met several times with Geragos and his legal team, no formal deposition was ever taken. Without it, her account would be considered hearsay and would never make it to Peterson's trial.
Robert Talbott, a law professor at the University of San Francisco, says Vivian Mitchell's testimony could have been damning for the prosecution's case, which appears to be overwhelmingly circumstantial so far.
"If the jury would have found her credible, it would have meant big problems for the prosecution," Talbott said. "It would have thrown their whole timeline off."
God Bless Vivian Mitchell, she was a very credible witness to the fact that Laci Peterson was kidnapped.
680 Date: 2004-02-08 02:08:10
Jordan McQueen ( no email / no homepage) wrote:
Vivian Mitchell was not an old fogey. It's too bad she is being treated like one -guess they have to do it now, to justify her death.
679 Date: 2004-02-08 01:46:35
This was posted, March 2, 2003 ( no email / no homepage) wrote:
Has it been pointed out that the Bill and Vivian Mitchell live next to the same river bed park system as the Peterson's? I'm very curious if these three parks have a trail meandering throughout?
Mrs. Mitchell said she thought Laci was heading for Kewin Park. Kewin Park is also a part of the very same river bed park system as the La Loma Park next to the Petersons. Apparently these parks adjoin...Kewin being to the SW of La Loma.
Could Laci have been either entering (or exiting)the park in the area of the Mitchell home?
Of course the MPD doesn't want the Mitchell's statement. Their entire focus since day ONE evaporates along with their *93* sacks of "evidence" in the event that the sighting of Laci after 10 a.m. that morning is verified.
===========================
Take a peek: Very interesting. recall the Peterson address is: 523 Covena Avenue, Modesto
William and Vivian Mitchell 231 Buena Vista Drive, Modesto
The Mitchells house has the star. The Peterson house is located at the upper right of the map (click on the arrow on the upper right side) The streets that follow the southern perimeter of this park run directly from the Peterson's to the Mitchell's. (The Peterson's resident is just around the corner from Edgebrook Dr., on Covena.)
No wonder the Modesto resident in this group who appears as a MPD mouthpiece wants to discount and disparage the Mitchell's as senile old fogey's. ..and the MPD doesn't want to hear anything about it.
It's obvious when you look at the map.
***You're right. The map certainly makes it look like the Mitchell house would be right along a likely dog walking route from the Peterson's. Interesting.
678 Date: 2004-02-07 15:08:23
Brian Walt ( no email / no homepage) wrote:
If the DA's Office uses emotional nutcases like Nancy Grace to discredit Vivian Mitchell, it raises serious suspicions.
Who else did they use?
I think it is very serious when a witness who proves that a defendant is innocent, is found dead. It's like the death of reason -to be replaced by the insanity that Nancy Grace promotes.
EVERYONE!!...
Email This To a Friend
Topic Commands
Click to receive email notification of replies 
Click to stop receiving email notification of replies