The Murder of Laci Peterson docu-series

[GolfPants]

Reminds me of the movie Gone Girl.

Yeah I noticed a ton of similarities

[bezarker]

Theory? Was there a trial for Jon Benet Ramsey? What does that have to do with this court case whatsoever?

[ChewYourFood]

if there is a shred of a reason to doubt then its reasonable doubt in the court. the fact there is zero forensic evidence,l nor an explanation to how she was killed, where she was killed and even when she was killed, makes it impossible to “know” he did it. all you have is speculation based on potential motive and his facial expressions.

bruh, anyone who would convict someone to death based on that is subhuman

The only people that KNOW what happened are Laci and the murderer

You are wrong. Reasonable doubt ≠ NO doubt.

Scott put himself at the location where her body was found on the day she went missing. Which just happens to be 85 miles from his house. I do have to give credit for choosing a scenic area overlooking the Golden Gate Bridge, some people throw their "loved" ones away like trash.

[DICE20]

I focking hate this revisionist history bullsh!t. Scott did it. Period. These "documentaries" leave out key details that get people thinking that maybe the verdict was all wrong. It's all about ratings. They did the same thing with OJ and Jon Benet.

Man,
I understand what you are saying, and I tend to agree with you. However this case and this documentary are quite different on several levels... Think back to the Making a Murderer docuseries regarding the conviction of Steven Avery.
This revisionist documentary may feel like is has the same flavor as the Laci Peterson documentary as it pertains to a strong bias towards the indicted ( and convicted ) suspect.

However it became quite clear as the series went on, the producers of Making a Murderer were leaving out mounds of evidence, both dna and circumstantial which proved to be absolutely damning. One google search asking
" what evidence was left out in the making a murderer series" would yield tons and tons of this left out evidence which would quickly ruin your emotions towards that documentary and suspicians towards Avery.

One simply can not do the same exercise and replicate the same results when googling
" what evidence was left out in the killing laci peterson documentary?"

There is just no forensic evidence here...

[ChewYourFood]

.

The burglars murdered her, took her body and waited for the police to name where Scott was that morning and they drove 85 miles and framed him? Reasonable? Come on.
When you anchor a body down at the limbs and there is sufficient deterioration on those limbs, the torso emerges intact. Its not strange.
Eyewitness testimony is notoriously unreliable.

[RH709]

Not to mention, no one who just lost their wife and son gets on the phone 9 days later and laughs and flirts and giggles with his gf telling her how sexy she is. NO ONE.

He did.

Your ideas and reasoning are insanely simplistic. You also fall victim to absolutes and do not let yourself have an open view because of it.

[Bosscoo]

There is just no forensic evidence here...

Her hair, stuck in his pliers, on his boat, that an expert testified was torn out violently.

The more logical alternative is, of course, an expert team of mastermind criminals who set out to frame Scott in the most intricate way possible, including using special mind control techniques that led to him being found with a blonde dye job, 15k cash, a gun, knife and a stolen drivers license.

[DICE20]

Her hair, stuck in his pliers, on his boat, that an expert testified was torn out violently.

The more logical alternative is, of course, an expert team of mastermind criminals who set out to frame Scott in the most intricate way possible, including using special mind control techniques that led to him being found with a blonde dye job, 15k cash, a gun, knife and a stolen drivers license.

Everything that I have read suggested it was just one hair found on a very rusted pair of pliers that showed zero sign of recent use??
i know they were using Mitochondrial DNA testing to identify the genetic makeup. I would assume if scott ripped her hair out with a pair of pliers, you would find plenty of tissue to run a normal dna testing analysis.

Her hair being on a pair of pliers in the boat still doesn't explain anything imo.


Just so everyone knows, I have zero dog in this fight. I am just a bit of a geek when it comes to cold case files and murder mysteries. I hope that there is some huge damning piece of evidence waiting to be found out there that will either remove all reasonable doubt or have it bury his ass.




I dont really care to comment on your other drivel about the cash and drivers license and died hair... You've obviously not educated yourself on this case.

[derkerkjerk]

The burglars murdered her, took her body and waited for the police to name where Scott was that morning and they drove 85 miles and framed him? Reasonable? Come on.
When you anchor a body down at the limbs and there is sufficient deterioration on those limbs, the torso emerges intact. Its not strange.
Eyewitness testimony is notoriously unreliable.

The burglars murdered her, took her body and waited for the police to name where Scott was that morning and they drove 85 miles and framed him?
You're mixing up different possible situations... both are plausible.
1. the burglars murdered her and took her body to the bay (big area to dump a body, easy access)
2. people may have kidnapped her and dumped her body in the bay days later, particularly after the news kept mentioning that was scott's alibi

Both are not unreasonable


When you anchor a body down at the limbs and there is sufficient deterioration on those limbs, the torso emerges intact. Its not strange.
I agree 100%. I said the EXACT same thing while watching the show "to be fair.. the prosecution said he weighed her down with anchors and that seems like logical places a weight may disconnect at a joint" However....

1. This still doesn't address the fact that another body washed ashore on the bay in the exact same way as Laci's which is a massive coincidence

Eyewitness testimony is notoriously unreliable.

Won't disagree with that at all. The difference here is
1. the eye witnesses all spotted her with her dog (noting the distinct white chest mark) at different times between 10:18 and 10:45 or so
2. it doesn't negate the mailman's story
-- a neighbor locked up the dog around 10:18 and closed the gate
-- the mailman came by the house after 10:18 and saw the gate back open
-- the dog didn't bark once at the mailman that day, despite always backing no matter where the dog was in or outside the house. this suggests laci was back outside and alive.
-- this corroborates people seeing her after 10:18, so she was alive after scott was gone

none of these things are unreasonable

[nn586]

for anyone interested in watching it online, i am starting it now

http://www.aetv.com/shows/the-murder...on-1/episode-6

[nn586]

Scott did it 1000%.

You can't really think he didn't do it. You must be joking.

[ChewYourFood]

The burglars murdered her, took her body and waited for the police to name where Scott was that morning and they drove 85 miles and framed him?
You're mixing up different possible situations... both are plausible.
1. the burglars murdered her and took her body to the bay (big area to dump a body, easy access)
2. people may have kidnapped her and dumped her body in the bay days later, particularly after the news kept mentioning that was scott's alibi

Both are not unreasonable

1. Is it normal for a burglar to murder someone and leave no evidence of a crime and hide a body 85 miles away?
2. They kidnapped her and:
a) didn't ask for ransom
b) killed her
c) dumped her body exactly where Scott places himself with the addition of media and law enforcement activity.

Have you actually thought any of this out?

When you anchor a body down at the limbs and there is sufficient deterioration on those limbs, the torso emerges intact. Its not strange.
I agree 100%. I said the EXACT same thing while watching the show "to be fair.. the prosecution said he weighed her down with anchors and that seems like logical places a weight may disconnect at a joint" However....

1. This still doesn't address the fact that another body washed ashore on the bay in the exact same way as Laci's which is a massive coincidence

You do realize a leading cause of death for pregnant women is murder? "The killings span racial and ethnic groups. In cases whose details were known, 67 percent of women were killed with firearms. Many women were slain at home — in bedrooms, living rooms, kitchens — usually by men they knew. Husbands. Boyfriends. Lovers." So the possibility of two guys killing their pregnant spouses in the San Fran area and dumping their bodies in the Bay is MORE likely than a serial killer that mysteriously ceased activity the day that Laci was dumped.

Eyewitness testimony is notoriously unreliable.

Won't disagree with that at all. The difference here is
1. the eye witnesses all spotted her with her dog (noting the distinct white chest mark) at different times between 10:18 and 10:45 or so
2. it doesn't negate the mailman's story
-- a neighbor locked up the dog around 10:18 and closed the gate
-- the mailman came by the house after 10:18 and saw the gate back open
-- the dog didn't bark once at the mailman that day, despite always backing no matter where the dog was in or outside the house. this suggests laci was back outside and alive.
-- this corroborates people seeing her after 10:18, so she was alive after scott was gone

none of these things are unreasonable

First you agree that eyewitness accounts are unreliable and then you not only cite eyewitness accounts, but you also extrapolate from those accounts to make baseless assumptions.

[buckeyenutz]

Not one bit of proof he did it. He's guilty of being an *******, sure... but, I don't think he killed Laci.

[nn586]

Not one bit of proof he did it. He's guilty of being an *******, sure... but, I don't think he killed Laci.

Either way he's 110% involved with it somehow and deserves his sentence. It's either he killed Laci or he got someone else to do it for him. But he is affiliated with it somehow.

[DICE20]

Either way he's 110% involved with it somehow and deserves his sentence. It's either he killed Laci or he got someone else to do it for him. But he is affiliated with it somehow.

I am going to make a statement here in regards to IF he actually killed her ...


IF HE DID KILL her, and he managed to dispose of the body without leaving a shred of DNA Forensic evidence to prove it. Without anyone seeing him dumping the body. Without anyone seeing him haul a 150 lb object wrapped in a tarp in that tiny boat... If he did manage all those things, then he may be the most efficient and clean and well planned and thought out killer there ever was.

BUT : You also have to say the following:

As astute and efficient and supremely careful as he was killing her without any evidence of doing so, he may be the worst anyone as ever seen about looking like he is guilty and doesnt give 2 ****s about her disappearance. They man is the most aloof and sorry person youve ever seen.


How can someone who seems to be such a dumbass and ridiculously not careful nor putting forth any effort in looking like he cares, actually do this in the time frame he had to have done it in???? Knowing the world would have you in the cross hairs right damn after you did it??

The plan just doesnt make sense to me.

[niospecv]

With his appeal hearing coming up soon he might get out of jail with all the neglected evidence that was missed before.

[ScionofShannara]

With his appeal hearing coming up soon he might get out of jail with all the neglected evidence that was missed before.

Just read up on this because of this thread. Scott is guilty as sin and isn't getting out of prison. There was more then enough evidence to convict him. Way too many coincidences that point to him. Some of the stuff has been mentioned here like telling his girlfriend that he would be single soon a few weeks before his wife died, trying to flee the country....err I mean go golfing with 15k in cash and a fake ID. But there were a few other things I found out:

He bought the boat shortly before his wife died and didn't tell people. There was also a neighbor who claimed to see the tarp Laci was wrapped in inside of Scott vehicle.

During the trial the defense tried to argue that Scott's boat would have tipped over if he had tried to toss the body out. However the refused to let the court test that theory on Scott's actual boat.

He made anchors for the boat out of cement and most of them are unaccounted for. The documentary tries to explain this away by pointing out he used some of the cement to patch some holes on his property. That doesn't explain however, where the other anchors went.

Forensic computer evidence shows that it seems like Laci used the computer to check out a few items that morning making it unlikely Scott could have killed here then. Unfortunately Scott messed up a checked his e-mail to look up some golf clubs he bid on with Ebay destroying the illusion. Also 72 hours after his wife went missing he subscribed to a bunch of porn sites. Nothing wrong with choking the chicken but if expect your wife to be coming back you wouldn't want that showing up on your credit card bill.

He sold her car after she went missing. Also, he didn't help search for her either.

The baby was found wrapped up outside of Laci's body. Couldn't find out if the baby came out of her decomposing body and was tangled up in trash or if the kid has been removed prior to dumping the body. If the baby was removed before being dumped...ice cold.

There were other things but that's what I could remember off the top of my head. The jury did it's job.

[buckeyenutz]

Either way he's 110% involved with it somehow and deserves his sentence. It's either he killed Laci or he got someone else to do it for him. But he is affiliated with it somehow.

Again, speculation and circumstance. No proof. Burden of proof is on the prosecution and all they (and armchair lawyers) can provide are theories (speculation) and the fact he was on the body of water where Laci and Connor were found (circumstance). Even the jurors interviewed after were still simply speculating and could not say how, when or where it happened. It fukking disgusts me that someone can be sentenced to death with 0 proof.

[iZZmatic]

I was only 9 when this happened, so I don't know much about this case but I'm planning on watching the doc soon. Loving the discussions on here. My favorite thread on the misc so far.

[Rayaarito]

This thread is a guilty until proven innocent when it's supposed to be innocent till proven guilty. Lol at you witch hunters. srs. If i was ever in a situation like this, i would hate for you guys to be on my juror. "This guy had 4 cell phones. He had to involved!!!!!!" ****ing plebs, srs.

[nn586]

Again, speculation and circumstance. No proof. Burden of proof is on the prosecution and all they (and armchair lawyers) can provide are theories (speculation) and the fact he was on the body of water where Laci and Connor were found (circumstance). Even the jurors interviewed after were still simply speculating and could not say how, when or where it happened. It fukking disgusts me that someone can be sentenced to death with 0 proof.

It doesn't disgust me one bit. Just take a look at the guy, he doesn't even give a ****.

[mp83]

I focking hate this revisionist history bullsh!t. Scott did it. Period. These "documentaries" leave out key details that get people thinking that maybe the verdict was all wrong. It's all about ratings. They did the same thing with OJ and Jon Benet.

And the "Making a Murderer" bull****

You have people watch a "documentary" and suddenly they are legal experts lmao

[Misctify]

This thread is a guilty until proven innocent when it's supposed to be innocent till proven guilty. Lol at you witch hunters. srs. If i was ever in a situation like this, i would hate for you guys to be on my juror. "This guy had 4 cell phones. He had to involved!!!!!!" ****ing plebs, srs.

This lol. Everyone in here saying he's "guilty as ****" are only providing circumstantial evidence at best or none at all. Enough evidence to take to trial? Sure. But enough for a conviction let alone the death penalty. Just lol. OJ had 100x more damning evidence and walked free.

[buckeyenutz]

It doesn't disgust me one bit. Just take a look at the guy, he doesn't even give a ****.

I couldn't give a **** about him, moreover disgusted with a) the legal system b) the media influence on verdicts and c) the Wal-Mart patronage gathered outside cheering like they'd just won a $500 scratch off.

[anonymous]

Great trailer, thanks OP!

[darkninja67]

Did they ever find her body??

[buckeyenutz]

Did they ever find her body??

Part of it

Edit: life is great, gotchoo on spread

[Power_Strike92]

Did they ever find her body??

yes.

[FAH_Q]

And the "Making a Murderer" bull****

You have people watch a "documentary" and suddenly they are legal experts lmao

This ^

[niospecv]

Just read up on this because of this thread. Scott is guilty as sin and isn't getting out of prison. There was more then enough evidence to convict him. Way too many coincidences that point to him. Some of the stuff has been mentioned here like telling his girlfriend that he would be single soon a few weeks before his wife died, trying to flee the country....err I mean go golfing with 15k in cash and a fake ID. But there were a few other things I found out:

He bought the boat shortly before his wife died and didn't tell people. There was also a neighbor who claimed to see the tarp Laci was wrapped in inside of Scott vehicle.

During the trial the defense tried to argue that Scott's boat would have tipped over if he had tried to toss the body out. However the refused to let the court test that theory on Scott's actual boat.

He made anchors for the boat out of cement and most of them are unaccounted for. The documentary tries to explain this away by pointing out he used some of the cement to patch some holes on his property. That doesn't explain however, where the other anchors went.

Forensic computer evidence shows that it seems like Laci used the computer to check out a few items that morning making it unlikely Scott could have killed here then. Unfortunately Scott messed up a checked his e-mail to look up some golf clubs he bid on with Ebay destroying the illusion. Also 72 hours after his wife went missing he subscribed to a bunch of porn sites. Nothing wrong with choking the chicken but if expect your wife to be coming back you wouldn't want that showing up on your credit card bill.

He sold her car after she went missing. Also, he didn't help search for her either.

The baby was found wrapped up outside of Laci's body. Couldn't find out if the baby came out of her decomposing body and was tangled up in trash or if the kid has been removed prior to dumping the body. If the baby was removed before being dumped...ice cold.

There were other things but that's what I could remember off the top of my head. The jury did it's job.

Stop reading at the bolded part. Coincidences does not mean concrete evidence. It's all circumstantial.