- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- 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
“Scott Peterson, The New Evidence”
Posted on 7/18/26 at 9:43 pm
Posted on 7/18/26 at 9:43 pm
The Innocence Project studied and is challenging the case. I saw a clip of this show on A&E while channel surfing last week and it caught my attention. So I recorded a 2 part, 4 hour documentary and just finished it.
My original thinking back then was guilty as hell. And I’ve maintained that hard core stance ever since.
After watching this documentary, I have serious questions about the case. I tried to let the facts they showed stand alone and there are so many flaws in the prosecution it’s crazy.
I also now realize everything I knew was derived from the press. And I now know the press is not trustable but didn’t know it then. So I question what I was led to believe.
He may still be guilty but wow, there are a lot of questions I have with this case.
Anyone else follow the case back then or watch this new documentary?
My original thinking back then was guilty as hell. And I’ve maintained that hard core stance ever since.
After watching this documentary, I have serious questions about the case. I tried to let the facts they showed stand alone and there are so many flaws in the prosecution it’s crazy.
I also now realize everything I knew was derived from the press. And I now know the press is not trustable but didn’t know it then. So I question what I was led to believe.
He may still be guilty but wow, there are a lot of questions I have with this case.
Anyone else follow the case back then or watch this new documentary?
26
Posted on 7/18/26 at 9:45 pm to OU Guy
So what's the new evidence?
Posted on 7/18/26 at 9:45 pm to OU Guy
No and no but i saw a show on netflix and that baw is GUILTY!
Posted on 7/18/26 at 9:46 pm to OU Guy
I haven’t seen it, but all I’ll say is it’s easy asf to “poke holes” in literally any prosecution’s case for any murder ever.
Women all get convinced by This Neat Trick.
Women all get convinced by This Neat Trick.
Posted on 7/18/26 at 9:46 pm to OU Guy
The 13th Juror podcast on this case made me doubt he was guilty.
Posted on 7/18/26 at 9:48 pm to Jim Rockford
quote:
So what's the new evidence?
Inevitably it will be poking holes in disparate angles of the prosecution. No coherent alternative story will be produced.
It’s all just picking at scabs, and housewives fall for this every time
Posted on 7/18/26 at 9:50 pm to OU Guy
The concrete anchors are all you need to see in this trial
That dude is guilty as frickin sin
That dude is guilty as frickin sin
This post was edited on 7/18/26 at 9:51 pm
Posted on 7/18/26 at 9:52 pm to OU Guy
2 things I remember about this case:
1. The wife was more attractive than the slutty gf
2. He owned 3 cell phones. I remember being very impressed by that
1. The wife was more attractive than the slutty gf
2. He owned 3 cell phones. I remember being very impressed by that
Posted on 7/18/26 at 9:52 pm to OU Guy
quote:such as?
He may still be guilty but wow, there are a lot of questions I have with this case.
you realize they played audio of his conversation with Amber? Nobody does what he did if he had an ounce of humanity while he wife was missing and they were searching for her.
Posted on 7/18/26 at 10:02 pm to OU Guy
That story was huge back in day and I always thought he was guilty. Documentaries can be biased but they’ve proven local law enforcement buffoonery and media spins are the norm.
Posted on 7/18/26 at 10:08 pm to Jim Rockford
I can’t explain 4hrs worth. You would need to watch and form your own opinion.
I’m also not saying he is innocent, but there are too many holes in how it was prosecuted.
What I like is they took time to retrace every step he would take. Like his house and you realize his driveway is right at street with not much room in it. To load a body he parked pickup facing house and would needed to carry it next to street to load.
They then drove to warehouse and its a small driveway when towing a boat. Not much room to navigate and right next to others. Would need to move body inside and then carry back and put in boat. Lots of weight. And then drive boat 90 minutes without a cover. And then put boat in water with people around who said they didn’t see anything large enough in boat to be a body.
But thats just a small part of it. There were 13 witnesses who saw Laci walking dog meaning Scott already left. There was a burglary right across the street and a retired law enforcement officer saw a pregnant lady being pushed into it but didn’t think much until he heard a pregnant lady was missing and called it into police.
The prosecution suppressed and destroyed evidence. The van used in safe burglary was found burned close by. Had a bloody mattress and was tested using old tech but they wonMt let them retest.
Dog was loose on leash and neighbor found it meaning its possible Laci was walking dog. She was a community watcher so may have confronted the van people as another witness claimed.
Defense was never told about van being found until years after case!
I could go on but just watch and form your own ideas.
He may still be guilty but the list of things suppressed by prosecutor is huge. Meaning Jury never got to hear any of that info.
I’m also not saying he is innocent, but there are too many holes in how it was prosecuted.
What I like is they took time to retrace every step he would take. Like his house and you realize his driveway is right at street with not much room in it. To load a body he parked pickup facing house and would needed to carry it next to street to load.
They then drove to warehouse and its a small driveway when towing a boat. Not much room to navigate and right next to others. Would need to move body inside and then carry back and put in boat. Lots of weight. And then drive boat 90 minutes without a cover. And then put boat in water with people around who said they didn’t see anything large enough in boat to be a body.
But thats just a small part of it. There were 13 witnesses who saw Laci walking dog meaning Scott already left. There was a burglary right across the street and a retired law enforcement officer saw a pregnant lady being pushed into it but didn’t think much until he heard a pregnant lady was missing and called it into police.
The prosecution suppressed and destroyed evidence. The van used in safe burglary was found burned close by. Had a bloody mattress and was tested using old tech but they wonMt let them retest.
Dog was loose on leash and neighbor found it meaning its possible Laci was walking dog. She was a community watcher so may have confronted the van people as another witness claimed.
Defense was never told about van being found until years after case!
I could go on but just watch and form your own ideas.
He may still be guilty but the list of things suppressed by prosecutor is huge. Meaning Jury never got to hear any of that info.
Posted on 7/18/26 at 10:18 pm to Jim Rockford
That an increasing number of idiots think he’s innocent.
Posted on 7/18/26 at 10:21 pm to OU Guy
quote:
can’t explain 4hrs worth. You would need to watch and form your own opinion. I’m also not saying he is innocent, but there are too many holes in how it was prosecuted. What I like is they took time to retrace every step he would take. Like his house and you realize his driveway is right at street with not much room in it. To load a body he parked pickup facing house and would needed to carry it next to street to load. They then drove to warehouse and its a small driveway when towing a boat. Not much room to navigate and right next to others. Would need to move body inside and then carry back and put in boat. Lots of weight. And then drive boat 90 minutes without a cover. And then put boat in water with people around who said they didn’t see anything large enough in boat to be a body. But thats just a small part of it. There were 13 witnesses who saw Laci walking dog meaning Scott already left. There was a burglary right across the street and a retired law enforcement officer saw a pregnant lady being pushed into it but didn’t think much until he heard a pregnant lady was missing and called it into police. The prosecution suppressed and destroyed evidence. The van used in safe burglary was found burned close by. Had a bloody mattress and was tested using old tech but they wonMt let them retest. Dog was loose on leash and neighbor found it meaning its possible Laci was walking dog. She was a community watcher so may have confronted the van people as another witness claimed. Defense was never told about van being found until years after case! I could go on but just watch and form your own ideas. He may still be guilty but the list of things suppressed by prosecutor is huge. Meaning Jury never got to hear any of that info.
You can do this for every murder - or event - that ever happened.
This is how people end up believing we didn’t land on the moon.
Posted on 7/18/26 at 10:22 pm to faraway
quote:
you realize they played audio of his conversation with Amber? Nobody does what he did if he had an ounce of humanity while he wife was missing and they were searching for her.
That makes him a douche bag but not a murderer. What I’m saying is Modesto decided the day she went missing he was guilty and proceeded from there. That tainted how they treated any other possible evidence. The prosecutor was found negligent in another case and the state had to pay $40m for damages for ruining another lawyer and families ives by framing them for a murder. She is not beyond that level.
The problem is some key info from case was destroyed and there is no way to retrial it. If he’s guilty fine, but if not then its a travesty.
I don’t care about his character, I just want the murderer to pay. And its 50/50they got the right one. They caught the burglars and they didn’t even try and fight it and pled guilty. Maybe they didn’t want to go to trial because they had something to do with it?
Too many witnesses were ignored. One of the best witnesses made statements and would have caused doubt. And they put her in a trance which is illegal in Cali and can’t be used in court. It seems prosecutors wanted her to be taken out and did that trance on purpose.
I would just say form your own opinions. But the amount of facts laid out were large. And at least makes me question if he got a fair trial. And I was a hardcore believer in his guilt. Still not saying he’s innocent rather they did such a poor job of following leads it brings things into question. And we’ll never be able to really know.
I sat on a 2 week jury and don’t blame them for verdict, they can only go on what is presented. And defense should have called more witnesses but thought they had done enough. And the defense didn’t get key information.
Posted on 7/18/26 at 10:24 pm to Obi Wan Ryobi
quote:
You can do this for every murder - or event - that ever happened
Sounds like you made up your mind and that's fine. A week ago I was the same way.
There were zero forensic findings. Cadaver dog did not alert at house nor W/H or boat.
No hair or anything at W/H or boat. Nothing at house like cleaning up blood. Thats a pretty good murderer to do all this alone and leave not a trace anywhere.
One other thing, the boat is a low draft one. To push out all that weight would cause it to tip in most cases, as water was not calm.
Anyways, I watched it with an open mind and just found so many questions. We’ll never know if other evidence would have made a difference.
This post was edited on 7/18/26 at 10:30 pm
Posted on 7/18/26 at 10:26 pm to OU Guy
He was tried in the media by the shrill Nancy Grace and various other female Lügenpresse.
Posted on 7/18/26 at 10:26 pm to OU Guy
Do you honestly believe she was randomly killed by mysterious murderers who didn’t leave any trace and they ended up framing Scott Peterson who happened to be arrested with died hair and disguises trying to cross the border to Mexico?
Posted on 7/18/26 at 10:29 pm to OU Guy
quote:
I’m also not saying he is innocent, but there are too many holes in how it was prosecuted.
Did he murder his wife or not? I say yes. Procedural errors are problematic, and present legal issues, but they do not nullify real life guilt. They found her body in the same body of water in the same area where he admitted he was fishing ON THE DAY SHE DISAPPEARED. Who else with knowledge of where Scott was on that day would transport her murdered body to frame Scott?
quote:
To load a body he parked pickup facing house and would needed to carry it next to street to load.
Not necessarily. It’s just the defense attorney’s suggestion. She was a small woman and could fit in a large ice chest.
quote:
They then drove to warehouse and its a small driveway when towing a boat. Not much room to navigate and right next to others. Would need to move body inside and then carry back and put in boat. Lots of weight. And then drive boat 90 minutes without a cover. And then put boat in water with people around who said they didn’t see anything large enough in boat to be a body.
Again, tiny women can fit in an ice chest. Concealing a body in a boat is easy.
quote:
But thats just a small part of it. There were 13 witnesses who saw Laci walking dog meaning Scott already left. There was a burglary right across the street and a retired law enforcement officer saw a pregnant lady being pushed into it but didn’t think much until he heard a pregnant lady was missing and called it into police.
None of them actually knew Laci. They only knew her from TV reports. What are the odds they would recognize a woman walking a dog weeks later after hearing about it on tv?
quote:
But thats just a small part of it. There were 13 witnesses who saw Laci walking dog meaning Scott already left. There was a burglary right across the street and a retired law enforcement officer saw a pregnant lady being pushed into it but didn’t think much until he heard a pregnant lady was missing and called it into police.
Plausible. But what are the odds that random burglars, burglarizing a house across the street filled with news media would also leave the body in the very same location hours away where the kidnapped woman’s husband was fishing that same day?
quote:
Dog was loose on leash and neighbor found it meaning its possible Laci was walking dog. She was a community watcher so may have confronted the van people as another witness claimed.
It’s more plausible that Scott needed an alibi so he put the leash on the dog and cut the dog loose to make it look like his wife had been walking the dog. What are the odds van people burglarizing a house would also kidnap a pregnant woman, kill her, drive her hours away and then get lucky enough to choose a location to dump the body where the primary suspect just happened to be fishing the same day?
Posted on 7/18/26 at 10:29 pm to OU Guy
quote:
Sounds like you made up your mind and that's fine. A week ago I was the same way.
If there is any evidence that he didn’t do it then I’m all for it.
But this whole “poking holes into the prosecution’s theory” trick is for housewives.
I’ll grant you it can create a fascinating alternative scenario. I get into it as well. But then you zoom out and realize it’s a parlor trick.
This post was edited on 7/18/26 at 10:31 pm
Posted on 7/18/26 at 10:35 pm to OU Guy
quote:
What I like is they took time to retrace every step he would take. Like his house and you realize his driveway is right at street with not much room in it. To load a body he parked pickup facing house and would needed to carry it next to street to load.
They then drove to warehouse and its a small driveway when towing a boat. Not much room to navigate and right next to others. Would need to move body inside and then carry back and put in boat. Lots of weight. And then drive boat 90 minutes without a cover. And then put boat in water with people around who said they didn’t see anything large enough in boat to be a body.
You find that compelling? That is just non sense
Page 1 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News