Comments by "AOK" (@aok4418) on "Will Scott Peterson Be Granted a New Murder Trial?" video.

  1. How horrible to sit in prison for something you didn't do while guilty people walk free.
    5
  2. The lead detective admitted tgat “Laci sightings were not a priority.” In what world do police ignore sightings in a missing person's case. Over a dozen witnesses haf seen Laci that day. At least 10 of those witnesses described her down to even the breed of her dog. The other thing that is significant is the fact police could NOT find a single woman that walked that day that could have been mistaken for Laci.
    4
  3.  @sophie8394  Who cares. The state is responsible for putting the wrong person in prison. If California citizens are worried about tax money. They should be okay with abolishing the dysfunctional death penalty that costs three times as much.
    3
  4.  @ashleyfrazee4789  Exactly
    3
  5. The lead detective admitted tgat “Laci sightings were not a priority.” In what world do police ignore sightings in a missing person's case. Over a dozen witnesses haf seen Laci that day. At least 10 of those witnesses described her down to even the breed of her dog. The other thing that is significant is the fact police could NOT find a single woman that walked that day that could have been mistaken for Laci.
    2
  6.  @jasonr9481  I see you have the person that calls themself " Laci Peterson " in your list. So it's no wonder you are misinformed.
    2
  7. Homer Maldonado: He and his wife had stopped to buy gas at the USA station on the corner of Miller Avenue and Camellia Way between 9:45 and 10:00 a.m. on December 24. After leaving the gas station they drove west on Miller. At the corner of Covena and Miller, Maldonado saw Laci and McK in front of the second house from the corner on the west side of the street (211 Covena). He described her as very pregnant and having trouble controlling the dog. When he checked his rearview mirror, he saw that Laci did not cross Miller but evidently turned the corner and continued walking west on the north side of Miller. Maldonado reported this to the MPD tipline on January 1, 2003. When he was not contacted by the Modesto Police, he went to the Command Post at the Park where he reported his sighting and spoke to the chaplain. He was never interviewed by the Modesto Police. In July 2004, during the trial, he was interviewed by an investigator from the DA’s office.
    2
  8. He wasn't trying to escape. He was driving North. He was arrested at Torrey Pines. This is the kind of BS lies that were reported at the time.
    2
  9. How did he kill his wife on the 23rd or 24th when Conners gestational age falls NO LESS than 6 days after her disappearance? Conner was alive, meaning Laci was alive.
    2
  10.  @alley1433  Right. He just managed to completely conceal any and all forensic evidence, and nobody heard or seen a thing.
    2
  11.  @brennanhuff2960  She tries. She's desperate.
    2
  12. ​ @sophie8394  The LAIP which is part of the Innocence project Network already has one exoneration in only a year Make some sense!
    2
  13. ​ @alley1433  Another name and another fake picture. Nice try VideoFanatic02, Christine White.
    2
  14. Chris Watts confessed. Cases are nothing alike.
    2
  15.  @jasonr9481  What about it?
    1
  16.  @jasonr9481  Petelikedporn Mia Gardner elizabethlacky Laney bobs Anne M David Day VideoFanatic Howdy Patty Sullivan Anne Sull Lucy Ainsworth Kim L Rick Tavares Slick Pete
    1
  17.  @heavenleeangeltalk8471  Sure, Karen.
    1
  18.  @alley1433  What does that have to do with guilt or Innocence?
    1
  19.  @jasonr9481  They tested the mop and the bucket. The mop did not have traces of Laci's blood and vomit. It was a lie. Furthermore, the house did not reek of bleach when LE went there on the 24th. That, too, was a lie. Evers and Brocchini both admitted, under oath, that there was no smell of bleach in the house that night. Still further, Evers and Brocchini both testified under oath that none of the floors were wet, to indicate the floors had been mopped after Scott returned from the Marina.
    1
  20. @jasonr9481  People's 240 B-D provide Kyo's pictures of the boat cover. Kyo noticed a gasoline smell on the boat cover, and collected some concrete debris from it.  Her presumptive tests for blood on the discolored areas were negative. A second request was made by the MPD for further testing of the boat cover.  This test was performed by Nancy Seger, who specifically looked for evidence of biological stains -- blood, urine, feces.  The tests were negative. Detective Grogan confirmed that there was no blood, no urine, no feces, no tissue, nothing on the boat cover except miscellaneous debris -- in fact, the boat cover had nothing of evidentiary value.
    1
  21.  @jasonr9481  You don't travel long distances with a boat cover on, genius. It destroyed them.
    1
  22.  @jasonr9481  Gas doesn't destroy DNA evidence. Educate yourself.
    1
  23.  @jasonr9481  The Criminalist for the California Department of Justice at the Ripon lab provided the analysis of both mops and the mop bucket. The items were received for testing on December 30, 2002. She reported that all smelt of common household detergents used to clean floors, not bleach or chlorine.  She did not find any blood, tissue, or other incriminating trace evidence, proving that none of the items were used to clean up a crime scene, neither inside the house or outside in the pool area.
    1
  24. @jasonr9481  Presumptive tests for blood on the discolored areas were negative. A second request was made by the MPD for further testing of the boat cover.  This test was performed by Nancy Seger, who specifically looked for evidence of biological stains, blood, urine, feces.  The tests were negative. Detective Grogan confirmed that there was no blood, no urine, no feces, no tissue, nothing on the boat cover except miscellaneous debris. In fact, the boat cover had nothing of evidentiary value.
    1
  25.  @jasonr9481  You're the one that brought up the boat cover.
    1
  26.  @jasonr9481  When was Scott concerned with detectable odor and gas? Don't make stuff up.
    1
  27.  @jasonr9481  There is no evidence of suffocation. And yes, bodies leave evidence after suffocation. NO EVIDENCE OF THAT. YOU FOLLOW!
    1
  28.  @jasonr9481  Show me where the medical examiner determined she died of suffocation?
    1
  29. @jasonr9481  Is that you Tabitha!
    1
  30.  @jasonr9481  Liar!
    1
  31.  @jasonr9481  Show me where the medical examiner determined she died of suffocation?
    1
  32.  @jasonr9481  It is the IP. The Innocence Project expanded in 2005. It includes partners of the Innocence Network. Get your facts straight!
    1
  33.  @jasonr9481  You Follow!
    1
  34.  @jasonr9481  Conner was alive no less than 6 days after her disappearance, genius. That means she was alive. The States own expert testified to that and so did the Medical examiner.
    1
  35.  @jasonr9481  Cut the sh*t. It's obvious!
    1
  36.  @jasonr9481  Keep avoiding the questions.
    1
  37.  @jasonr9481  Liar!
    1
  38.  @jasonr9481 You didn't.
    1
  39.  @jasonr9481  Why wouldn't he? He kept the boat in the warehouse. There was no need for a cover. Of course, you think he should have covered the the boat, while driving to Berkeley.
    1
  40.  @jasonr9481  Lol. Is that your explanation for no physical or forensic evidence? You are hilarious.
    1
  41.  @jasonr9481  Wrong. Strangulation often leaves body fluids.
    1
  42.  @jasonr9481  You follow!
    1
  43.  @jasonr9481  Here, you are rambling on about a boat cover that was tested, and results were negative like everything else.
    1
  44.  @jasonr9481  While we are on the topic about her neck. Laci's 4th, 5th, and 6th cervical vertebrae were missing. That isn't caused by distdisarticulation.
    1
  45. @jasonr9481  He's Innocent. Conner was determined to be alive until Jan 3rd by both the States expert and the Medical examiner? Furthermore, Dr Charles March testified there is no way that Scott and Laci Peterson's unborn baby could have died any earlier than Dec. 29, 2002. Dr Allison Galloway, the States own expert and forensic anthropologist, determined the baby could have even been alive as far along as Jan 14th. How is he guilty if Laci was alive after the 24th?
    1
  46.  @jasonr9481  How could you possibly know that? Did you test it?
    1
  47. @jasonr9481  The witnesses weren't interviewed by police. Quit lying. I'm tired of correcting your lies everywhere. Unless you want to name these witnesses and post their statements.
    1
  48.  @jasonr9481  You must be confused. Because most of the witnesses did not say that.
    1
  49. @jasonr9481  The defense didn't call those witnesses because Grogan excuses the MPD failure to follow up on tips by citing Karen Servas’ 10:18 timeline for finding McK. Even if Karen Servas’ timeline were accurate, which it is not, MPD did not have information about her reinvented timeline until January 3. The detectives did nothing to confirm that her time source was valid. Grogan also says tips were not followed up because phone records indicate that Scott was still in his neighborhood at 10:08. This theory did not take shape until shortly before trial. Two prosecution witnesses stated that cell phone records were not designed to be used to identify location. Grogan also uses the excuse that tips were not investigated because witnesses reported Laci wearing black pants and her body was found wearing tan pants. MPD did not have this information until mid-April when Laci’s body was found. Then Grogan indicates that sightings outside of the park were discounted because Laci was planning to walk in the park. This is blatantly false and Grogan knew it. Grogan had been present on December 26 when Chris Boyer interviewed Scott Peterson at his home. Scott clearly stated that Laci sometimes walked in the neighborhood. He told Boyer, in Grogan’s presence that Laci had walked on Sunday, December 22, in the neighborhood.
    1
  50.  @jasonr9481  That's not what I said. Grogan couldn't call witnesses. He didn't interview any.
    1
  51. @jasonr9481  Go ahead. Provide the names of these witnesses who had seen her between 9:30 and 10:15? Quit regurgitating lies from reddit, Patty!
    1
  52.  @jasonr9481  I'm waiting, you clueless schmuck!
    1
  53.  @jasonr9481  Go ahead. Provide the names of these witnesses who had seen her between 9:30 and 10:15? Quit regurgitating lies from reddit, Patty!
    1
  54.  @jasonr9481  It's a simple question.
    1
  55.  @jasonr9481  Or are you creating another account right now!
    1
  56.  @jasonr9481  ​@petelikedporn6009 Quote " Brenda Myers they always try and say Mrs Mitchell wasn’t followed up on. It looks like she was, according to the police statement. Same thing with Maldonado and Aguilar. Their tips were taken but the set of events made their sightings not credible. The reason for the non crediblity was wrong clothing, wrong time period, wrong area where she walked, etc." You are a complete idi*t.🤦‍♂️ This is why you are wrong. 1. Of course the tips were taken. The point was nobody followed up on the tip. You understand how that works Patty? Of course you don't. People call the tip line or 911 and someone re ords the tip. It is then up to detectives to follow up. 2. The events did NOT make her tip " not credible " police claim that Mrs. Mitchell saw another pregnant woman walking her dog and not Laci Peterson.  So, who was the woman she had seen, Patty? Police couldn't find another woman who matched Laci's description that walked that day. Oh right, that was made up. Bill Mitchell her husband and former city councilman called the police and get was never called back. You said "she was, according to the police statement." So where is this police statement you speak of, Patty?
    1
  57.  @jasonr9481  Coward!
    1
  58.  @jasonr9481  Petelikedporn Mia Gardner elizabethlacky Laney bobs Anne M David Day VideoFanatic Howdy Patty Sullivan Anne Sull Lucy Ainsworth Kim L Rick Tavares Slick Pete
    1
  59. @jasonr9481  Wrong. These are approximate times. If you did your research, you would know this. You should also know Scott gave various estimates for when he left home, all falling between 9:30 and 10:30. we know he didn't leave at 9:30 because he watched Martha Stewart and talked about meringue that aired at 9:48.
    1
  60.  @jasonr9481  We also know police could not find a woman that walked that day that could have been mistaken for Laci despite the many times they lied about it, Patty!
    1
  61. @jasonr9481  Gene Pedrioli saw Laci and McK around 10 a.m. on the morning of December 24 around the time he picked up a prescription at a pharmacy. He saw them on La Loma Avenue in the same area where they had been seen by Aguilar. He noticed McK because he has a dog the same color. He said that the woman and the dog had to walk around some branches that were on the sidewalk. Pedrioli made 2 calls to the MPD tip line. He was told that he would have to prove his whereabouts. He thought the police were not interested in his tip. He was never contacted by them or by the DA’s office.
    1
  62. @jasonr9481  Martha Aguilar: Around 10 a.m. on the morning of December 24, Aguilar saw Laci and McK walking on La Loma Avenue in the same general area that Freitas saw her. She was sure it was Laci. Aguilar lived 2 blocks south of Laci on Covena and they went to the same doctor. Aguilar’s call to the MPD tipline was never returned. She was never interviewed by anyone from MPD or from the DA’s office.
    1
  63.  @jasonr9481  Tony Freitas: Around 10 a.m. on the morning of December 24, Freitas was driving his regular delivery route northwest on La Loma Avenue when he saw Laci and McK near the intersection where there is a small, grassy triangular park, located on La Loma between Santa Barbara and N. Santa Ana. Freitas reported this to the MPD tipline on December 30, 2002. The woman who took his call said he would be contacted by a detective. Freitas was never contacted by anyone from the Modesto Police Department. On July 29, 2004, during the trial, he was interviewed by a DA Investigator.
    1
  64.  @jasonr9481  Grogan was the lead detective genius. He doesn't call witnesses to testify. Are you confused.
    1
  65.  @jasonr9481  Harshman Grogan testimony Between 2-4 PM that day, Tom Harshman, who had lived in Modesto, had seen a young pregnant woman being forced into a van. After driving past he was so upset that he turned around and went back. to the spot hoping to find the van still there and hoping to get more information about the license plate number. who lived in Modesto, saw something that really concerned him near the corner of Scenic Drive and Claus Road as he was driving with Elizabeth Harshman between 2 and 4 p.m. on the afternoon of December 24. He saw a young pregnant woman being forced into a van. He called the MPD that day and multiple times later. He was never called back. GERAGOS: And they have witnessed the incident, and don't know if they have called Modesto PD yet or not, correct? GROGAN: Correct. GERAGOS: Okay. JUDGE: Does he say what time of the day that was? GERAGOS: This was at 10:08? GROGAN: That would be 10:08 a.m. GERAGOS: So, at this point, Mr. Harshman has called on the 28th at 6:50 said he saw a woman being forced into a van, gave a description of the van. Then approximately two months later a New York City police detective says, I have talked to, presumably, Harshman's wife who may have witnessed the incident, correct? GROGAN: Yes. He got the information from a friend of Miss Harshman's, Mr. Harshman's wife, I believe. GERAGOS: Okay. And specifically you contacted him on May 18th, 2004, correct? GROGAN: Yes. GERAGOS: And he, when you contacted him, he told you that the same day he called into the police department. You put it down at 12:28, right? GROGAN: Yes, based on that tip. GERAGOS: I don't think you ever saw this. I'm just going to show this to you. When I went through the tip lines, at 14789, it looks like somebody called in, but the name that was written down was Thomas Harsh. Do you see that? GROGAN: I see it. GERAGOS: Okay. You hadn't seen that before right now, had you? GROGAN: No. GERAGOS: Okay. It says, reporting that three or four days ago he saw a pregnant lady being pushed into a van. Caller given to Detective Holmes. You were not aware that Harsh had indicated that it was three or four days prior to the 28th when he had actually phoned in; isn't that correct? GROGAN: No, I don't think so. GERAGOS: Okay. This is the first time that you have seen that, because when the caller, whoever took down the information, they just wrote Harsh as opposed to Harshman, correct? GROGAN: Correct. GERAGOS: Okay. And he said that he, specifically, on the same day that he had called in, he had seen a van parked on the south side of Scenic, west of Claus, which he described as a 70s, American-made model, beige in color, correct? GROGAN: Is that the tip that you are reading from top? GERAGOS: No. I'm at 4527. GROGAN: Yes. GERAGOS: And they have witnessed the incident, and don't know if they have called Modesto PD yet or not, correct? GROGAN: Correct. GERAGOS: Okay. JUDGE: Does he say what time of the day that was? GERAGOS: This was at 10:08? GROGAN: That would be 10:08 a.m. GERAGOS: So, at this point, Mr. Harshman has called on the 28th at 6:50 said he saw a woman being forced into a van, gave a description of the van. Then approximately two months later a New York City police detective says, I have talked to, presumably, Harshman's wife who may have witnessed the incident, correct? GROGAN: Yes. He got the information from a friend of Miss Harshman's, Mr. Harshman's wife, I believe. GERAGOS: Okay. And specifically you contacted him on May 18th, 2004, correct? GROGAN: Yes. GERAGOS: And he, when you contacted him, he told you that the same day he called into the police department. You put it down at 12:28, right? GROGAN: Yes, based on that tip. GERAGOS: I don't think you ever saw this. I'm just going to show this to you. When I went through the tip lines, at 14789, it looks like somebody called in, but the name that was written down was Thomas Harsh. Do you see that? GROGAN: I see it. GERAGOS: Okay. You hadn't seen that before right now, had you? GROGAN: No. GERAGOS: Okay. It says, reporting that three or four days ago he saw a pregnant lady being pushed into a van. Caller given to Detective Holmes. You were not aware that Harsh had indicated that it was three or four days prior to the 28th when he had actually phoned in; isn't that correct? GROGAN: No, I don't think so. GERAGOS: Okay. This is the first time that you have seen that, because when the caller, whoever took down the information, they just wrote Harsh as opposed to Harshman, correct? GROGAN: Correct. GERAGOS: Okay. And he said that he, specifically, on the same day that he had called in, he had seen a van parked on the south side of Scenic, west of Claus, which he described as a 70s, American-made model, beige in color, correct? GROGAN: Is that the tip that you are reading from top? GERAGOS: No. I'm at 4527. GROGAN: Yes.
    1
  66.  @jasonr9481  Harshman Grogan testimony Between 2-4 PM that day, Tom Harshman, who had lived in Modesto, had seen a young pregnant woman being forced into a van. After driving past he was so upset that he turned around and went back. to the spot hoping to find the van still there and hoping to get more information about the license plate number. who lived in Modesto, saw something that really concerned him near the corner of Scenic Drive and Claus Road as he was driving with Elizabeth Harshman between 2 and 4 p.m. on the afternoon of December 24. He saw a young pregnant woman being forced into a van. He called the MPD that day and multiple times later. He was never called back. GERAGOS: And they have witnessed the incident, and don't know if they have called Modesto PD yet or not, correct? GROGAN: Correct. GERAGOS: Okay. JUDGE: Does he say what time of the day that was? GERAGOS: This was at 10:08? GROGAN: That would be 10:08 a.m. GERAGOS: So, at this point, Mr. Harshman has called on the 28th at 6:50 said he saw a woman being forced into a van, gave a description of the van. Then approximately two months later a New York City police detective says, I have talked to, presumably, Harshman's wife who may have witnessed the incident, correct? GROGAN: Yes. He got the information from a friend of Miss Harshman's, Mr. Harshman's wife, I believe. GERAGOS: Okay. And specifically you contacted him on May 18th, 2004, correct? GROGAN: Yes. GERAGOS: And he, when you contacted him, he told you that the same day he called into the police department. You put it down at 12:28, right? GROGAN: Yes, based on that tip. GERAGOS: I don't think you ever saw this. I'm just going to show this to you. When I went through the tip lines, at 14789, it looks like somebody called in, but the name that was written down was Thomas Harsh. Do you see that? GROGAN: I see it. GERAGOS: Okay. You hadn't seen that before right now, had you? GROGAN: No. GERAGOS: Okay. It says, reporting that three or four days ago he saw a pregnant lady being pushed into a van. Caller given to Detective Holmes. You were not aware that Harsh had indicated that it was three or four days prior to the 28th when he had actually phoned in; isn't that correct? GROGAN: No, I don't think so. GERAGOS: Okay. This is the first time that you have seen that, because when the caller, whoever took down the information, they just wrote Harsh as opposed to Harshman, correct? GROGAN: Correct. GERAGOS: Okay. And he said that he, specifically, on the same day that he had called in, he had seen a van parked on the south side of Scenic, west of Claus, which he described as a 70s, American-made model, beige in color, correct? GROGAN: Is that the tip that you are reading from top? GERAGOS: No. I'm at 4527. GROGAN: Yes. GERAGOS: And they have witnessed the incident, and don't know if they have called Modesto PD yet or not, correct? GROGAN: Correct. GERAGOS: Okay. JUDGE: Does he say what time of the day that was? GERAGOS: This was at 10:08? GROGAN: That would be 10:08 a.m. GERAGOS: So, at this point, Mr. Harshman has called on the 28th at 6:50 said he saw a woman being forced into a van, gave a description of the van. Then approximately two months later a New York City police detective says, I have talked to, presumably, Harshman's wife who may have witnessed the incident, correct? GROGAN: Yes. He got the information from a friend of Miss Harshman's, Mr. Harshman's wife, I believe. GERAGOS: Okay. And specifically you contacted him on May 18th, 2004, correct? GROGAN: Yes. GERAGOS: And he, when you contacted him, he told you that the same day he called into the police department. You put it down at 12:28, right? GROGAN: Yes, based on that tip. GERAGOS: I don't think you ever saw this. I'm just going to show this to you. When I went through the tip lines, at 14789, it looks like somebody called in, but the name that was written down was Thomas Harsh. Do you see that? GROGAN: I see it. GERAGOS: Okay. You hadn't seen that before right now, had you? GROGAN: No. GERAGOS: Okay. It says, reporting that three or four days ago he saw a pregnant lady being pushed into a van. Caller given to Detective Holmes. You were not aware that Harsh had indicated that it was three or four days prior to the 28th when he had actually phoned in; isn't that correct? GROGAN: No, I don't think so. GERAGOS: Okay. This is the first time that you have seen that, because when the caller, whoever took down the information, they just wrote Harsh as opposed to Harshman, correct? GROGAN: Correct. GERAGOS: Okay. And he said that he, specifically, on the same day that he had called in, he had seen a van parked on the south side of Scenic, west of Claus, which he described as a 70s, American-made model, beige in color, correct? GROGAN: Is that the tip that you are reading from top? GERAGOS: No. I'm at 4527. GROGAN: Yes.
    1
  67. @jasonr9481  Scott gave Bruce Peterson his full name and correct address. Because that is the procedure. It was filed the same day and the records from the DMV reflect the purchase. Scotts full name and mailing address to his home. He certainly didn't give his address at the warehouse, did he? That would have been good way to keep it a secret. But he didn't do that. GERAGOS: And so wouldn't that, if you're buying a boat on December 9th and you're listing your home address as 523 Covena, wouldn't one expect, especially if he's bought and sold vehicles in the past, that you're going to get a notice from the DMV? That's not exactly a place that you would want to put that address to hide it from Laci Peterson, would you? GROGAN: No, it would not, it would come to the house, or any mail that went between the Department of Motor Vehicles would go to the address that's on there. GERAGOS: Okay. As opposed to if you put the Emerald Avenue address, or something like that, correct? GROGAN: Correct. Scott also offered to pay with a personal check that can be traced back to him. Bruce Peterson testified he asked for cash. So, Scott went to the bank and got cash that he used to pay for the boat. That alone is evidence that there was no attempt to but a secret boat. If Scott wanted a secret boat, he would have bought the unregistered boat with no paperwork to be filed with the DMV. $1400 withdrawn from Scott and Laci's joint checking account.
    1
  68.  @jasonr9481  It is the Innocence Project. Can you get anything right. The Innocence Project is a founding member (along with several longtime partners) of the Innocence Network, an affiliation of independent organizations working to overturn wrongful convictions and improve the criminal justice system."
    1
  69.  @jasonr9481  🤦‍♂️ It is the IP. The Innocence Project expanded in 2005. It includes partners of the Innocence Network. Get your facts straight!
    1
  70. @jasonr9481  Maldonado, Freitas, Aguilar and Pedrioli called the MPD tipline to report that they had seen Laci on the morning of the 24th. None of their calls were returned by MPD. The initial investigation of these tips was done by defense investigators, not by the Modesto police. Not until the trial were investigators sent by the District Attorney to interview Maldonado and Freitas. Aguilar and Pedrioli were never interviewed by police or by prosecutors.
    1
  71. @jasonr9481  Maldonado, Freitas, Aguilar and Pedrioli called the MPD tipline to report that they had seen Laci on the morning of the 24th. None of their calls were returned by MPD. The initial investigation of these tips was done by defense investigators, not by the Modesto police. Not until the trial were investigators sent by the District Attorney to interview Maldonado and Freitas. Aguilar and Pedrioli were never interviewed by police or by prosecutors.
    1
  72.  @jasonr9481  It is the IP. The Innocence Project expanded in 2005. It includes partners of the Innocence Network. Get your facts straight!
    1
  73. @Jasonr The Innocence Project expanded in 2005. It includes partners of the Innocence Network. Get your facts straight!
    1
  74.  @alley1433  They did know when he left the house. Can you read the GD trial transcripts and quit with the lies. He never changed his story, either.
    1
  75. Innocent
    1
  76. They did know when he left the house. They can determine he was on the way to the warehouse by 10:08.
    1
  77. He told dozens of people he was fishing including police. At around 6:11 pm, the first officer, Sergeant Evers, arrived on the scene after Laci was reported missing. When he asked Scott where he was that day, Scott immediately told him that he had been fishing that day in the bay. Scott also gave Sgt. Evers his receipt from the Berkeley Marina parking lot to show that he'd been at marina that day. Cell phone records and transactions confirm where he was. -A timed receipt from the Berkeley Marina, for the time he said he was there. Three eye-witnesses that place him there when he said he was there--a gardener, and two fishermen. Cell phone records for multiple calls made from points near the Berkeley Marina, beginning at the time he said he left the Marina, and tracking him homeward.
    1
  78. He called the home phone and her cell. Look it up, trial records.
    1
  79.  @alley1433  It's called cell data and corroborating evidence from events from witnesses at the time.
    1
  80. @alley1433  We know Russell Graybill delivered the mail between 10:35 and 10:50 that morning. Scott was not there. The gate was open, and McKenzie was not on the property. Laci was walking McKenzie.
    1
  81.  @alley1433  Why would he call Laci's cell again once it was found in her car?
    1
  82.  @alley1433  Cookies and meringue  Martha Stewart on December 24th at 9:48am. 9 minute drive to the warehouse. Checks voicemail 10:08 on the way there. Logged into his email at work between 10:30 and 10:56. So, it appears he left the house between 9:48 and 10:08.
    1
  83.  @alley1433  Who is Jamie? I told you to quit posting lies. You haven't done that. Now you're sulking because you ate called out. Grow up!
    1
  84.  @alley1433  You best look around. The truth is coming out. Who's minds am I worried about changing. So far, everything you posted is false. What does that tell you!
    1
  85.  @alley1433  That's what I thought. Another misinformed armchair detective.
    1
  86.  @dm48344  The LAIP falls under the Innocence Network that was established in 2005 that makes up the IP.
    1
  87. ​@alley1433 The LAIP is part of the IP. The IP expanded in 2005 creating the Innocence Network. The LAIP is one of 70 that make up the Network.
    1
  88. Chris Watts didn't have a trial. He gave a full corroborated confession.
    1
  89. The prosecutions theory hinged on Laci being dumped in the bay. Their own expert could not explain why Laci or Conner where found where they were. He couldn't produce any scientific data to prove the States theory. Conner was alive well after the 24th. Conners body was above the water break and high tide line No animal feeding on Conner. Plastic wrap get knotted around his neck that had to be cut off, not far from a plastic bag which was never tested. His left ear was permanently flattened against the head, and a rectangular piece of material was over his ear. No evidence of Laci being dead in any alleged crime scene. No cadaver scent of Laci being dead in the boat, warehouse, truck, or home. No witnesses seen Scott transferring a body in broad daylight and no witnesses ever seen anything that could have been a body in the boat. Laci's injuries or bodily conditions are not consistent with the State's theory. Laci's uterus was at least 10 cm (3.9") smaller than it should have been? Certainly explains why the incision to remove Conner was not visible on her body, and the injured 9th rib, postmortem injury is in the same location where such an incision would have been made. Laci's 4th, 5th, and 6th cervical vertebrae were missing. The State had no explanation for this. Yhe vertebrae column will not disarticulate. The SF Medical examine told the lead detective that it would be highly unlikely that 32 lbs would submerge the body. It would just float. He also said the currents would likely take the body out to sea. She was found nearly 4 months later. How do currents flowing Southbound at 4 knots place either body where they were found. No evidence proving Scott made more than a single anchor. Detective Brocchini was more than happy to fabricate that lie. Media ran with it. Evidence concludes Laci was alive and dismembered. Conner was handled well after her disappearance. Unless someone can give a compelling explanation as to how SP committed this murder with these facts alone, I would love to hear it.
    1
  90. You have posted under no less than 100 names on YouTube alone. That doesn't even include the other platforms you post on. You are a troubled individual. ANON EMOUS (removed by YouTube) Sammy (removed by youtube) Robbin Miller ( removed by YouTube) Lisa Lisa,Provethio Altum,Trick or Trump,Lawrence Robinson, Tiffsaver, Robin Miller, Poonan Bhatia, Ava Martinez, Tippy Canoe, Mia Gardner, Kmremseysmith, oanne, nolaflav, jackiepowell, yes-Anastatia, 2034916, Lizk1780, PatrickFDolan, Pointerlover, darlenesutton, Bare Jessup, ararabrann, Nataliebierman, bobstuckrath, trobtwillis, user-ls9nr6kq3q, goergialee, trobtwillis, janegardener, PatrickFDolan.... Christine White Leslie King
    1
  91. The judge didn't understand how jury selection worked, and it was overturned. Keep up!
    1
  92. If you believe that, you have no idea.
    1