He won’t show or talk about the results of the polygraph he took with his lawyer.
He is not offering to take a polygraph with the police. If he passed his own polygraph, he could be confident that he’d pass one given by law enforcement. This would take a lot of the investigation rescources off of him and back on to finding his missing wife and unborn son.
He looked extra “fake” when crying during the Diane Sawyer interview.
I’ve “convicted” him! How about you all?
I just hope they can find and convict whoever did it, whether that’s Scott or someone else.
Then we can finally put the one missing person/murder case in the country to rest!
Yes, trial by jury is so over-rated. Let us drop this out dated system and go for trial by media.
Things are looking more suspicious all the time.
Now Mr. Peterson says he cut his hand and bled all over the car the day Laci vanished. This seems like he’s trying to explain away the presence of fresh blood in the car.
But why on earth would anyone kill their pregnant wife and unborn son?
I agree. That whole “innocent until proven guilty” thing, that is just so pre-9/11. :rolleyes:
Duke, Zebra–Lighten up. This thread is just for fun. Maybe I’m a victim of the media once again, like with OJ, but I can guarantee that you wouldn’t be willing to put any of your hard earned money on the line betting Scott P. is innocent.
And Duke…I roll my eyes right back at ya, for the 9/11 comment. :rolleyes:
I should have previewed. I’ll retract, my “for fun” comment…and change that to “for discussion”
I’m really not trying to make light of Laci Peterson’s disappearance.
IMO, I think this issue shouldn’t even be getting the kind of media attention that it is currently receiving.
Personally, I hope she found out about his affair, bided her time, planted the blood in his truck and then left him to suffer the consequences while she high-tailed it to Argentina to start a new life for her and her son.
Doubt it though…
In this day and age, if my wife goes missing, the first thing I would do is hire a lawyer. And the first thing he/she would say: Don’t talk to anyone without my permission.
That said, gut reaction, he’s guilty. But, I’m sure it will come out in the end, so don’t worry.
-Tcat
I hope she just walked away and started a new life for herself, as well. The final and ultimate ‘ha ha’ to you, s.o.b.
There was an interiew shown on Fox’s On the Record the other night of a friend of Scott’s.
Greta asked if he felt Scott was capable of having killed Laci, and the friend’s comments (after quite some hesitation) went something like this:
"There is no, uh, doubt in my mind … that Scott is guilty, er, I mean not guilty … "
Freudian slip? I think not…
That and the way Scott Peterson’s mouth curled up at the edges when Diane Sawyer asked him about Laci … he looked like he was trying incredibly hard not to laugh out loud. Scott also referred to Laci in the past tense, i.e. “She knew about the relationship”, and such.
Very curious indeed.
The whole incident with the store clerk who claims to have seen her just makes this whole thing seem more and more like some really poorly written soap opera, and somewhere I heard some snippet of a rumor about it being reported somewhere that ‘she’s not really missing’?
I agree that coverage on this is a little extreme, but it’s too bizarre to ignore.
Personally, I think he’s either a) guilty as hell or b) this is some really awful PR for a new reality series of some sort.
I find the pickup in stories on ‘mean-spirited reality shows’ in the press quite odd, and the coincidence is something that could prove to be disturbing.
Or maybe I’m just off my rocker.
The thing that nags at me isn’t the insurance or the polygraph (polygraph tests are a little better than crystal balls - a little) or any of the “leaks” that Laci PEterson’s family keeps barfing up.
What nags at me is that he didn’t tell the cops about the affair.
Let me ask you this. You’re a man having an affair. Your wife disappears and you had nothing to do with it, you don’t know where she is. Maybe she ran away, maybe she was kidnapped, you don’t know. Isn’t the woman you were having an affair with a rather OBVIOUS suspect? Wouldn’t you want the cops to check her out? Kind of a huge motive, n’est-ce pas?
But Scott Peterson DIDN’T put the cops on his girlfriend’s tail. Hmm.
It’s not proof by any means, but it’s a very strange thing for him to do.
Well, I would add ‘alledged’ to the topic, but other than that, yes.
I think it all comes down to motivation. Who else on the face of the earth would want her dead? She wasn’t rich or famous and had no value in a ransom demand. As far as we know, she had no mortal enemies. Now we look at hubby- having an affair and he takes out an isurance policy on his wife. Supposedly goes fishing when she disappeared. My guess is she’s at the bottom of the Pacific and won’t be found.
First of all, polygraphs are junk science. That’s why they are not admissible in court. If my wife went missing there is no way I would take a polygraph but I would certainly cooperate with the police as much as I possibly could even if it increased the chance that I would get incorrectly blamed. I wouldn’t contact a lawyer and only speak through him.
The insurance thing has been poorly reported from what I have seen. They had equal policies on each other.
What is scarey is the possible connection to Elizabeth Smart. Around ten years ago this young lady disappeared off of the campus of Cal State San Louis Obispo without a trace. Scott (and Laci) attended CS-SLO at that same time. There was a report that the SLO police have been contacted by the investigators of the Laci disappearence. Elizabeth’s body has never been found. This guy could be a serial killer.
Haj
There was a news item I saw where the police said there was no link.
Part of me hopes that he had nothing to do with her disappearance. The reason is that it would put to bed all of these expert TV pundits.
So he had a life insurance policy. There was one on him too. $250K is not a lot of money, especially in California. If he were to do it for that, why not $500K or a million. I’ve also heard where the police dismissed that angle anyway.
Is he a sleaze for having an affiar on his pregnant wife? Absolutely. Does that mean he’s a murderer? No.
My gut tells me he did have something to do with it just because that’s always the first place you look but to analyze his every move as justification is silly.
What was this I heard about a clerk somewhere thinking she may have saw her in December with an older, rugged looking man? SHe had claimed to be kidnapped but the clerk forgot to callt he police? Did anything develop from that?
Who? Should I care?
Weird and as yet unconfirmed development for those of you who care.