Not for the weak of heart. Graphic details.
http://www.bayarea.com/mld/mercurynews/news/5632737.htm
Has anyone heard anything else about this as yet?
Mods, please feel free to move this to the correct forum if I have erred in placement.
It does kinda point that way but there is no definite ID yet.
If it is her, where was she from Dec. 24 until the baby’s birth? She wasn’t due until February sometime, right? So if it is her (and her full-term baby), she must have remained alive until Feb. at least. Weird.
My guess is that the baby was removed from her body and the coppers ain’t tellin’ anyone.
As far as the baby being full-term, they could have been off on their calculations when she got pregnant. Also, can’t you consider it full-term if it’s only a few weeks early…like, non-life threateningly early?
On the www.lacipeterson.com website they say she was eight months pregnant, which is very close to full term. The end of January would have been her ninth month. (It’s actually determined by forty weeks, not nine months, per se.)
I heard about this on the way to work. What was so odd was I was just thinking about her yesterday and went hopping around the net to see if there was any news…I had a weird feeling there should have been. (No, I’m not clairvoyant, but I’ve played one in my living room.)
All I hope is there is enough forensic evidence to point the finger directly at her killer, and let justice prevail. I know nothing about forensic medicine, but it just seems that being in the ocean for four months isn’t going to be very helpful to the case. I hope I’m wrong on that, though.
I’m also confused as to why the baby showed up at a different place. I really hope her body naturally delivered the child, rather than someone actually taking it from her, and tossing it. Especially if the forensic finger points to Scott Peterson. Man, that just makes me physically sick to think anybody could do this to a person, let alone her own husband and father of their child.
Jesus Christ.
We haven’t even figured out if it is her or not. Sadly there are many missing women in America. Laci Peterson is only one of them.
Yep, it could be just coincidental that these bodies washed up only a couple of miles from where Scott Peterson’s marina.
Could be, but. . . .
I’m no forensics expert and I was wondering the same thing out loud to a friend last night. She is familiar with these kind of things and explained it to me. The only cite I can provide is “my friend said so” so take it for what it’s worth. I don’t know she’s right, but the way she explained it made sense.
I can’t repeat it as well as she explained it, but basically she was saying that if it is her, then what most likely would explain it is that the body in the water would have made the body so bloated, it would have expelled the baby on it’s own, which would also explain why the baby’s body was found with the umbilical cord attached.
She also said that from what the reports of the condition of the two bodies are, there is a very good chance they will be able to get DNA from both of them.
The location is right and from what little information was provided in the news, it sounds like it’s likely Laci and Conner, but wasn’t it just a few days ago, there was a report of her being sighted in New Mexico or Arizona or something???
I’d like the this to end…and if they have been murdered, the perp is nailed, but being the eternal optimist, I keep hoping for some miracle.
Amnesia sounds good to me.
Not realistic, but… sigh
They report the body was dismembered. I suspect otherwise. Decomp in water for that long, and your heaviest features will seperate and fall off. Head, and then legs. I suspect her spine is still intact, but the muscle and tissue that held the cranium in place either was nibbled away by the local fish, or merely decomposed.
Another possibility is weights were placed around her head and legs, to sink the body. Bouyancy of the gasses exceeded the tensile strength of the rotting flesh, you can guess the rest.
I wonder if the local constibulry is now taking a close look at Scott’s boat to inventory the anchor and rode lines, or lack thereof.
I have little confidence of this. That smirking son-of-a-bitch might still get away with it.
Of course, he could possibly be innocent. I don’t want him convicted without enough evidence. But (assuming Laci and the baby were murdered) whoever did this may turn out to have been more clever than the cops. It’s really sad.
Extremely sad. and I agree. I have very little confidence at this point too.
It could be someone other then her husband, but if that is the case, then who 
If it is the husband, one report I read last night said the police weren’t sure where he even is at the moment.
The door is wide open for WAGs. I’m trying to cut down… those calories are a killer… but, dang, it’s not easy in this case. :mad:
Kathy
I can’t get the idea out of my mind that who ever this turns out to be is someone’s daughter, sister, wife, mother, etc. Somewhere there’s a family that’s going to be getting a call/visit informing them the remains of the missing woman have been found
and
perhaps the same people, but maybe someone else, will be informed about a baby boy. or, the other possibility, someone gave birth, didn’t want the baby or something along those lines, and disposed of him.
I litterally am sick to my stomach thinking about it.
Kathy
Well, I could have seen this coming a mile away. Too bad Scotty managed to only get her two miles away from his fishing boat.
Hopefully there is enough evidence available to convict this sicko.
Hmmm. Your Merc article says the corpse was wearing maternity clothes, Lyllyan, but this Modesto Bee article says not. Also stated in the Merc article was that it looked like the corpse of a pregnant woman. I’m betting this will turn out to be her. If there were maternity clothes, then friends or relatives could possibly identify those sooner than it takes to get DNA tests back.
Hmm, pugluvr, FoxNews does not say anything about maternity clothing either, and CNN is reporting that the remains were skeletal. Authopsies have been performed but are inconclusive, according to CNN.
Per MSNBC in an interview with Contra Costa Times reporter Brian Anderson, three sources claim the body was wearing maternity undergarments, one source says it was not maternity garments.
And, it’s autopsy, in the above, not “Authopsies” obviously.
how could they tell it was a pregnant woman if it was only skeletal remains?
they could most likely tell it was a woman. they might possibly be able to tell if she had given birth when alive. (pelvic canal might show marks.) but an undelivered pregancy prior to death?
i’m having trouble with that assessment. not that i’m a forensic scientist, of course.
lachesis
And the sea will tell…
If Laci Peterson’s body were found within a mile or two of the very place Scott Peterson said he was that day, and nowhere near the place he claimed his wife was going, he could be convicted on circumstantial evidence alone. It would not take a lot of supporting evidence to put it past a reasonable doubt. Given the other circumstantial evidence, I think you could sell it to a jury. You could sell it to me, and I’ve actually defended the guy on this message board.
We were at lunch today at a Mexican restaurant. A co-worker said suddenly, “Do you think it’s Laci?”
I looked at my carnitas and said, “No, I think it’s pork.”
I can’t help it. That’s just the way I think.