Autopsy results were leaked to the press. 7 a.m this morning having breakfast with my fiance I watched Good Morning America give lurid detail into Laci Peterson’s autopsy and that of her unborn child Cooper.
No arms, legs, intestines or head, Laci’s Body washed up. Her child, fetal nine month old Cooper not far from Laci’s emaciated remains, with duct tape around his neck. The remains of a concrete bag not far from the bodies.
Why does America and the World need to know this on National T.V?
Did the Freedom of Information Act have the upper hand, or was the the work of a toady-reporter?
On a personal note, I would feel absolutely terrible if she were my daughter. Having to hear the more than gruesome details of her corpse described on National T.V.
Americans have to know because they like grisly details.
Take o g r i s h and r o t t e n . c o m (sorry for the spaces, but I don’t want to be responsible for accidentally linking directly to them). There’s a market in that sorta stuff.
I think it’s disgusting, myself. Let them have some dignity after death, because they sure didn’t have any in death.
They didn’t plain and simple. Ratings, the allmighty dollar bill! all played a piece.
I saw the boradcast as well, you could tell Charlie Gibson did not want to be talking about it, he has a daughter roughly the same age as Laci was.
Pitiful, completely disgusting if you ask me.
Some time sI wish I could shake a huge, giant sized index finger at the medi shakes imaginary giant sized index finger****Shame on you! You should be ashamed of yourself for airing details about this terrible act. Show some dignity for Chrissake!!
What I heard was that the bit about the tape around Conner’s neck was leaked somehow, and so the DA’s office decided to release the formerly sealed report in order to put the leaked part in context.
Perhaps off topic, but back in the early part of the last century it was common for fairly bloody, horrible, crime scene pictures to be on the front page of newspapers. Of course we all know that public executions used to be quite the attraction. All of which is just to say that this is nothing new, and has nothing to do with FOIA.
Whether the defense leaked the report or not, they had to be aided by someone in the chain of the investigation who had access to the report. At this stage, it could go either way.
This is not a new phenomenon. The local paper (Courier-Journal) won a Pulitizer 15 years or so ago for a photo that appeared on the front page of the paper after a “disgruntled” employee (who was off his Prozac and whose estate later sued over the drug’s use) shot up the paper’s printing plant and killed a bunch of people. The photo showed a dead man sprawled on his back over a piece of machinery. He was identifiable in the picture. Some friends of mine who were photojournalism students at the time had huge erections over the pic. My mother was absolutely appalled at the use of such a graphic photo, mostly out of concern for the family, as was mentioned in the OP.
Basically, there’s nothing too outrageous or graphic if it’s “news”.
Well not to be a wiseguy, but if you don’t want to see horrible things, I’d suggest turning off the TV, selling it, cancelling your newspaper subscription, getting rid of your Bible, and going to live under a rock. Although I hear centipedes and worms and other nasty things live under there
