- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: I hate weak minded people (Scott Peterson case)
Posted on 5/23/21 at 1:52 pm to Tuscaloosa
Posted on 5/23/21 at 1:52 pm to Tuscaloosa
He’s actually super smart. Only a psychopath can believe his own lies and keep the investigation going on so long before caving.
0
Posted on 5/23/21 at 1:56 pm to danilo
Exactly. Scott Peterson couldn’t look at dead baby Connor during the trial.
Posted on 5/23/21 at 2:01 pm to Big EZ Tiger
quote:
I know, he should have been dead already. I believe the system worked. Circumstantial evidence is admissible in court and can be used to legally convict people as it does each day in America. 12 people with functioning brains and common sense listened to all of the evidence and felt that he was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
The bodies could have turned up anywhere, but they just happened to surface in a body of water near where this genius said he decided to go fishing. And he said he just decided to go fishing on the spur of the moment on Christmas Eve (after 12 pm) because it was "too cold" to go golfing that day. Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. It's so cold out on the golf course that I'll go on the water instead where it's windy and much colder than on the golf course. Also, his two-day fishing license was for December 23rd and 24th.
He told his mistress that his wife had died on the same day that he bought his boat about two weeks before he "went fishing" and his wife mysteriously went missing. He also cried and told her that this would be his first Christmas without her. Hmmm. And she disappears right before Christmas. Someone went through a lot of work to make sure that body didn't surface and it surfaced anyway.
A man with a new flame not wanting to be tied down to his wife who is about to give birth has all the motive in the world to get rid of her and it's nothing we haven't heard before with psychopaths.
I think he convicted himself. If there was no Amber in the picture, I don't think he would have been convicted in spite of him going fishing when it was "too cold" to play golf and where his wife and child's bodies were found. Close call, but the Amber factor was huge and things he said to her as you pointed out were huge. That supported the other circumstantial evidence. It fit right in.
I'm convinced without a doubt that he killed his wife. If there had been no Amber factor, I would not be convinced. I'd be about 50-50 which is not enough to convict.
Posted on 5/23/21 at 2:21 pm to Gris Gris
quote:
If there was no Amber in the picture, I don't think he would have been convicted in spite of him going fishing when it was "too cold" to play golf and where his wife and child's bodies were found.
I agree that Amber Frey coming forward was huge because then the motive appeared. Before that, things seemed quite fishy with his story, but there was no motive other than people saying that maybe he didn't want to have a child. After Amber Frey came forward, the motive was clear (and from testimony, it seemed he didn't really want to have a child either). Combine those two things along with all the stuff he was telling Amber Frey and it all fit together.
Posted on 5/23/21 at 2:30 pm to WaydownSouth
The one I was thinking about was Drew Peterson, but I do remember this case. I just read up on it to refresh my memory and I can only come to the conclusion that you are trolling.
Posted on 5/23/21 at 2:31 pm to Big EZ Tiger
Yep, Amber was the key along with Scott's behavior. That New Year's Eve in Paris call was the epitome of stupidity. If you didn't dislike Scott Peterson before, you certainly did after that was released.
The news of his missing wife was national news. How can that guy have been so dumb? It's really beyond comprehension.
The news of his missing wife was national news. How can that guy have been so dumb? It's really beyond comprehension.
Posted on 5/23/21 at 2:32 pm to WaydownSouth
quote:
Seems like the Chauvin trial, except 10x worse
Uh there was video in the Chauvin trial
Not even close as far as comparisons go
Posted on 5/23/21 at 3:27 pm to Powerman
Once those bodies were found in the bay he was done. At that point the burden shifted to the defense. Anybody can claim they were framed and they usually do. They didn’t need to tell us who did it at that point but just prove Scott Peterson couldn’t have done it.
Posted on 5/23/21 at 3:41 pm to WestSideTiger
quote:
Once those bodies were found in the bay he was done.
The one thing he counted on never happening still happened when those bodies still surfaced. That put him right where the bodies turned up.
The dude sounded so guilty on those recorded tapes with Amber Frey when she kept asking him why he said that his wife had died and that this would be his first Christmas without her prior to her going missing and he would not answer her. She asked him over and over and he kept saying that he wanted to tell her why he said that, but he couldn't to "protect" them and just kept blaming everything on the media.
Posted on 5/23/21 at 3:45 pm to rondo
quote:
Says the dude that watched a docuseries and is now an expert
Posted on 5/23/21 at 3:46 pm to WestSideTiger
This post sent me down a rabbit-hole this morning. Thanks OP 
. I knew this event vaguely. This is interesting:
Scott Peterson Appeal
He may have killed his wife and child, IDK, but this is some thin gruel with which to convict a person of murder. Shitty detective work and cognative bias abounds. He was the ringer from the start.
The other thing that was interesting is that all of his recorded phone calls with Amber Frey are posted on youtube after his wife dissapeared. Shamefully I listened to about an hour of that shite, and I leave it to you to make your own jugement. Not what I was expecting, and alot of the shite you read in media is innacurate from transcripts and listening to the calls.
If were to wager I think he possibly commited murder, but the courtroom isn't supposed to be a football game to be wagered. He has no prior behavior to suggest anything. Also a question for the criminal attorneys, and I beg your pardon. What is the logic in EVER having a jury trial? There were so many things they got wrong, just handling judge instructions for example. Why not always have the judge make the verdict?
. I knew this event vaguely. This is interesting: Scott Peterson Appeal
He may have killed his wife and child, IDK, but this is some thin gruel with which to convict a person of murder. Shitty detective work and cognative bias abounds. He was the ringer from the start.
The other thing that was interesting is that all of his recorded phone calls with Amber Frey are posted on youtube after his wife dissapeared. Shamefully I listened to about an hour of that shite, and I leave it to you to make your own jugement. Not what I was expecting, and alot of the shite you read in media is innacurate from transcripts and listening to the calls.
If were to wager I think he possibly commited murder, but the courtroom isn't supposed to be a football game to be wagered. He has no prior behavior to suggest anything. Also a question for the criminal attorneys, and I beg your pardon. What is the logic in EVER having a jury trial? There were so many things they got wrong, just handling judge instructions for example. Why not always have the judge make the verdict?
Posted on 5/23/21 at 3:52 pm to alpinetiger
quote:
Why not always have the judge make the verdict?
Because you have the right to jury trial. You may also request a bench trial, in most states
Posted on 5/23/21 at 3:54 pm to Big EZ Tiger
quote:
The dude sounded so guilty on those recorded tapes with Amber Frey when she kept asking him why he said that his wife had died and that this would be his first Christmas without her prior to her going missing and he would not answer her.
I don’t think he told her his wife died. He said he lost his wife and that would be his first Christmas without her. And one of his responses was something like “There are different types of loss Amber”. Doesn’t change anything though.
Posted on 5/23/21 at 4:01 pm to MoarKilometers
quote:Of course I know that. But wouldn't you want a seasoned law-dog/judge to preside, weigh evidence and decide your case? Especially if innocent beyond a reasonable doubt? I've been on one jury in my life and it completely changed my perception of the justice system. I'll leave it at that. My takeaway is that you never, ever want to wind up in a trial.
Because you have the right to jury trial. You may also request a bench trial, in most states
Posted on 5/23/21 at 4:15 pm to WestSideTiger
quote:
I don’t think he told her his wife died. He said he lost his wife and that would be his first Christmas without her. And one of his responses was something like “There are different types of loss Amber”.
He called it a tragedy and said he would explain it at a later time but that he was spending time with his family in Maine due to the situation and he admitted that he never went to Maine, etc., when she was on tape recalling everything he told her. He was implying that she was dead.
Posted on 5/23/21 at 4:22 pm to alpinetiger
With a judge you have to be 1 for 1 saying not guilty. With a jury you only need to be 1 for 12. His best chance was with a jury. Geragos even said that once Amber Frey tapes were played his best chance was mistrial or appeal. The investigation and trial are an entirely different matter in this case. Both were handled badly. Pro Peterson jurors were dismissed under unusual circumstances and they would only allow pro death penalty jurors. Lots more too.
Posted on 5/23/21 at 4:26 pm to WaydownSouth
Then why did he change his appearance and try to flee country??
Posted on 5/23/21 at 4:43 pm to MBclass83
quote:I'd be more inclined to do that if I were innocent. Wouldn't you? Ask Andy Dufresne.
Then why did he change his appearance and try to flee country??
Posted on 5/23/21 at 4:44 pm to alpinetiger
quote:
Also a question for the criminal attorneys, and I beg your pardon. What is the logic in EVER having a jury trial?
Requesting a bench trial in a criminal case is a very rare occurrence. There are numerous reasons you want a jury trial but the overarching reason is with a bench trial you have to win over the lone trier of fact, with a jury trial in a criminal case you only have to win over one of a group of people. Plus the jury is almost certain to be full of people who are less legally savvy than a criminal court judge.
Page 5 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News