The Murder of Laci Peterson

Being from Modesto I was very interested in this series. I know the area from which Laci disappeared and was eager to watch this series to confirm that he was guilty. So much for that! I'm not sure I've ever seen such compelling evidence that he is NOT guilty. He's a loser for sure, a cheater and a liar, and an incredible narcissist. But guilty of murdering Laci, I'm afraid not. Or if he is, then he is quite possibly the most oblivious human to walk the planet.

For those of you who are so certain that he IS guilty, I'm guessing you're also the people who think O.J. is innocent. You clearly had your mind made up prior to watching this show and are not going to change your mind no matter what. Well, maybe if you had video of Scott being in Tulsa during the 4 hours surrounding her disappearance. But aside from that you're no better than Nancy Grace - who, by the way, should be put in a jail cell along with Gloria Gomez just for behaving the way they did during the lead up to the trial and the trial.

There is not one piece of solid evidence (circumstantial or otherwise) that points to Scott being guilty. There is a ton of evidence that he is narcissistic, a cheater, and a liar, and incredibly apathetic - but evidence that he is guilty? Not one shred. The fact that the police lied about the burglars who robbed the house across the street should be evidence enough to get him a new trial. That nobody thinks it's important that the witness who saw the van that day not only told police, but that the police then said it was a different day (when in fact, the front of that house was covered with news people the day the police say the place was robbed) is just insane.

Like I say, I was CERTAIN that he was guilty. Would have been the first to convict based on what I'd seen and heard in the news - but it's simply not true. It's a shame that the police can't ever admit wrongdoing and try to right the fact that this guy sits on death row and I'm about 90% sure he's not guilty. I can't say 100% because I wasn't there.

A good series - it clearly does lean toward trying to defend Scott - but that's not what changed my mind. I can see that for what it is. It's the lack of evidence, the fact that the jury was biased, the crazy alternate juror who ended up convincing some of the folks to vote guilty (she should be put in jail along with Nancy Grace and Gloria Gomez - they should all share a cell), and the fact that most of what we'd seen/read in the papers was distorted so badly that we didn't have all the facts.

It's a shame - I'm sure, as he said, that he was convicted by the media and his apathy certainly didn't help matters. I'm guessing he'll be thinking about that for many years to come.

Boy, after all these years, the tragedy of the case just hits me in various ways. I did NOT follow the case / trial when it was happening but thought I had a general idea of what was going on but after watching this I'm blown away by how lax the investigation and court trial seemed to be.

Another really scary side note is how vested people were in the verdict when they didn't even know these people! Folks were behaving like they were at a sports game: cheering for the verdict. What the hell? A young mother had been murdered along with her unborn child, and their father was found guilty of the crime. What are you cheering for?

Some deep seated issues were on full display. Seems as though it is very likely Scott Peterson did not commit the murder. Although I must admit, if he didn't do it he has some of the worst luck ever!

Sad, he had no pity for his wife and unborn child. I feel sorry for his family, he is never getting out. He is as guilty as sin. If all these claims made in this documentary are true, why weren't those people called to testify? Because they didn't want to commit perjury or be shown as a liar(s). He is going to die in prison.

You can think Scott Peterson did this. But the criminal legal system hinges upon reasonable doubt - "such doubt as would cause a reasonable person to hesitate before acting in a matter of importance." So do I think OJ Simpson killed Ron and Nicole? Sure do! Do I think that, in court, the prosecution prove this beyond a reasonable doubt? Nope! Not guilty is not that the defense proved the defendant is innocent. Rather it is that the prosecution could not prove the defendant is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Remember that when you watch this show.

Shows both sides, really liked it - but left me terribly overwhelmed and defeated... i am in my early thirties and i feel paralysed by this s*** quite frankly. tired, of society and people. wtf is happening to common sense and broadening your horizon?

so many absurd factors playing into what should be a fair, objective, neutral legal process, in which facts are layed out - for the prosecuted & victim somehow ultimately.

• the media

i am again disappointed by humanity. look at what things morph into. the media: sensationalistic jodeling about their personal emotions (there is even a mini bio on nancy grace's destiny thrown into..) when they should be reporting news as in facts. otherwise go write a blog and call it 'nancy's thoughts on'. ( to me, it was disgraceful to watch her getting so much attention for craving attention. i could not yet understand what qualifies her to comment on pending investigations, trials etc... she was never a judge as far as i know? you can watch her ego literally exploding when somebody laughs at her sarcastic sum ups & provoking interpretations.) gomez lady is no better. if these 2 ladies were an instrumental, pivotal voice in "news"-reporting ( i don't know how much air time they have on US-tv? ) i see no light at the end of the tunnel. but i guess... yes, what is a life compared to the ratings of news-shows?

• single individuals, so narrow-mindedly making it about themselves... it's astonishing

why did amber inject herself so prominently into this? how do a few dates with him qualify her as a character witness? if this is a really legit step/ action in a legal process, i am truly afraid. people who met me 4 times could decide over my life? apropos being afraid - i did not understand why she stated so many times that she was scared. of what? talking to him on the phone? i suspect more it's the adrenalin of being part of sthg exciting.. tapped phones & cheating, a disappearance & possible murder! you only see this on primetime tv! she got a massive kick out of being involved in this.. everyone would, of course , it's the adrenaline. but she really milked it. this is & will be the highlight of her life. and she will tell herself years from now 'she did the right thing' - 'for the family' ... she will say 'she just had to come forward and tell "the truth" '... distorting the obvious insertion and dramatization of her role. does that only make me sad? (hasn't anyone read the spectacle by Dubord?) the 'pretty lady' on tv arguing for his guilt mentioning possible strangulation instead of asking for facts and posing genuine questions? didn't/ don't viewers think this is somewhat breaching the line? who is she to imply that? & gomez lady about how her connections and how the people just like to talk to her. and she is so this and that.. nancy, her face and loud voice roaming free over the whole screen when she should put more energy into double checking facts. truly disturbing.

• the jury

the handling of the jury was like sthg out of a soap opera. the judge not declaring a mistrial.. - i never understood people saying they trust the jury, they just want a trial.. a jury is made of humans. humans have egos. many of them bigger than they should be. if a bully is preferred over questioning attorneys or doctors on a jury then...i rest my case.. there is nothing else to say..

so yes. i am left speechless and under the impression that the law and justice-system is nothing but a platform for marketing campaigns and a stage for judge-wannabe's.

excited to see the next docu about this case in 10 yrs ... maybe we can see some parallels to the michael peterson case...

( i personally wouldn't take his 'unemotional' demeanor as a sign for it. he wasn't spectacularly emotional when he was charged, nor when he was convicted -- i wish more people would be interested, care for and dive into psychology - there is a 2 part essay about this sort of behaviour (scott peterson is also mentioned as an example) it talks about being/acting so 'aloof'/robotic... in "unusual" situations... look it up. also.. who wouldn't turn into a shell-shocked stone in his place - if he is innocent. this is the ultimate trauma, leaving you with no orientation at all. there is no up and down. there is only wobbly nothingness. you don't trust anything you perceive. this again brings me to the masses in front of their tvs. surely most of the viewers experienced trauma in one way or another? how can everyone be so judgemental and not ashamed at all? )