Scott Peterson Murder Case | Did bad science convict the wrong person?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 29 вер 2024
- This video answers the question: Can I review the Scott Peterson murder case? I'll be taking a look at the timeline here and then some of the evidence from the prosecution and defense and then talking about some of the mental health, personality, and human behavior factors that played a part in this case. This analysis is based on information that's been reported. I'm not diagnosing anybody that is involved in this case, rather just speculating based on what could have happened in a situation like this.
www.psychology...
www.psychology...
www.psychology...
www.scottpeter...
The guy didn't have a boat and didn't fish before. He buys a boat, goes boating FOR THE FIRST TIME the morning his wife disappears, and then his wife's body is found in the same body of water where he went boating. What are the odds? Please, instead of getting bogged down with the details of the trial, look at the big picture with some good old common sense.
We’re there any witnesses of Scott transporting a large body like figure or hiding a figure like that in his boat? No. In fact there’s multiple witnesses seeing Scott at the dock and reported he had no abnormal behavior at all. So it seems like Scott was able to transport this body on to his boat in broad daylight with 0 eye witnesses seeing a body like figure in his boat or transporting it?
@@RiceBowl510 There were no witnesses seeing Chris Watts kill his family either. Usually murderers hide the bodies of their victims, it's not like they're going to be showing off their trophies. A body on the bottom of the boat, covered by a piece of tarp would not be visible from probably ten yards away.
@@LaVidayElTristeFinal Ok valid arguemnet, but does it make any sense that Scott is going to kill his wife at 9:30am, then by 9:48am already have her body wrapped in a tarp and in his truck in the span of 18 minutes, then proceed to stop at his warehouse where he “sent chrismas greeting to his boss and looked up instructions on how to assemble a wood working tool he just got in the mail with his dead wife in his truck? Scott doesn’t seem like a calculated cold blooded killer. He is the opposite, a man with a credited degree from Cal Poly and a social, well liked person who is soft spoken. There is no history of rage or anger in his life which points to the opposite of his alleged behavior. Sure he was a cheater and womanizer, but for the media to grab upon these behaviors and crucify him for it is unjust.
@@LaVidayElTristeFinal also, although Chris watts and Scott’s cases are similar, Chris killed his wife and kids in the early hours of the day and drove out to the oil tanks far before sunrise. Scott was beleive to kill his wife in his home then transport her body in broad daylight. Although he’s not showing it off like a trophy, you still have to take out a 150 pound body and transport it into a boat in broad daylight, then drive past all the other boat docks with other ppl. There are witnesses stating that they didn’t see any tarps or large figures in Scotts boat while at the dock
@@RiceBowl510: The guy had already told his mistress, days earlier, that he had lost his wife. And then he loses her for real. You can question individual pieces of the puzzle. But when you put them together, a very clear image emerges.
And again, what are the odds that the body of his wife will be floating in the very same place where he went boating?
The two leading theories are: The husband killed his pregnant wife, which corresponds with crime rates for pregnant women who are often killed by their partners; or that some random person killed a pregnant woman AND then took the time to frame the husband by watching the news, learning of his favorite fishing spot, and the dumping the body there. Sure, you wish every killer was nice enough to leave boatload of evidence, but in reality, not every case has hard evidence. That's why you have common sense and strong circumstantial evidence.
I Believe he Killed his Wife and Child , he wanted another life (fantasy) listen to tapes with his extra marital girl …….this man was Spoilt and selfish …..
Plus how probable are the bodies turning up where he fished on CHRISTMAS EVE ???? as well he goggled or searched tide patterns ….. sorry he’s Quilty !!!
@@tamichambers7455 that never happened lol. The bodies turned up months later. The police, within 2 days, stated on TV where Scott had been fishing. The robbers across the street, of which a neighbor who knew lacy saw her confront on 24th, all of a sudden were told of a perfect place to dump her and frame him. There's so much evidence that's cone out now, and admitted by the detectives, that was purposely done to mislead or omit. He will likely get a new trial.
Common sense has no place in deciding whether someone is guilty of any crime, let alone murder. It's amazing how often so-called common sense takes us in the wrong direction, human minds have so many biases that what appears as common sense is just plain wrong. The only question to be answered is was he guilty beyond a reasonable doubt? That doesn't always require hard evidence, that could be a mixture of strong circumstantial evidence plus the lack of a plausible alternative, for example.
You might think that the straightforward theory is more plausible than the alternative in this case (Occam's razor and all that), and I'd agree with you. But that's not the question - the question is is there some part of your mind that believes the alternative might be possible? For me, with my shallow understanding of the case, there is enough doubt.
@@cb3514 Yet the SF Medical examiner hold detective Grogan how unlikely it would be for the bodies to stay in one place for nearly 4 months. He also explained 32 lbs of alleged weight was most likely not sufficient.
GERAGOS: Okay. Now, when you talked to Boyd Stephens, he also told you and he was the San Francisco, or still is the San Francisco Medical Examiner. He told you that in cases previously where bodies have bloated with decomposition, that they pulled as much as eighty pounds of weight up with the body surfacing in the Bay, correct?
GROGAN: Yes
.
.
.
GERAGOS: And he said victim would likely have traveled with the currents for a considerable distance before any exposed weights could catch something on the bottom, or the current would allow the object to stay in one place long enough for the weights to begin to sink in the mud.
GROGAN: Yes. When talking about the Richmond Turning Basin area, there.
GERAGOS: If it had made it to deeper waters, it's possible the body would still be in pristine condition, right?
GROGAN: Yes, sir.
The fact that he changed his hair color and attempted to cross the border with a bunch of cash pretty much seals it for me that he did it.
Either that or he assumed he’d be arrested anyway, and he didn’t want to be executed for something he didn’t do.
@@Iiwii11 If I ever kill someone, I want YOU on my jury.
That is false. Sad that it sealed it for you.
He never attempted to cross the border. He was 30 miles from the border in San Diego. He was headed north and arrested at Torrey Pines, where he was scheduled to play golf with his father and two brothers.
Scott's mom, Jackie, was going to loan John the money to buy out Scott. John was then going to take over the payments.
On April 8, 2003, Jackie went to Bank of America to withdraw $10,000 from an old account she rarely used. She did not know her account number, so she gave them her social security number to look it up. Unbeknownst to Jackie, she was listed on Scott and Laci's checking account as well. (Jackie had opened that account with Scott in 1991. Scott added Laci when they were married and never removed his mother.) The bank gave Jackie $10,000 from Scott's checking account. The withdrawal receipt was entered as Exhibit D8Y1.
Jackie paid Scott $8000 cash for his equity in the Dodge pick up. She paid him cash so he could better negotiate while shopping for a car.
On April 12, 2003, Scott purchased a Mercedes from Michael Griffin. He paid him with 36 $100 bills. Scott had $4400 left of the $8000 his mother had given him.
Scott discovers the $10,000 withdrawal from his bank account. He sees the withdrawal ticket signed by his mom and calls her.
Jackie then goes to Washington Mutual on April 17th and withdraws $10,000 cash out of her account. She gives the money to Scott that day to replace the money she took out of his account. She paid him in cash so that the bank would not put a hold on the funds. Scott now has roughly $14,400 in cash.
Scott is arrested the morning of April 18th . He had yet to deposit the money his mother had given him the day before.
@@darrell3643 I take that as a compliment, but I’m not sure you meant it that way.
@@Iiwii11 You really would be a good juror. I can't believe the bad police work on this.
The cell phone forensics from Scott's phone gave away his location and ultimately where he dumped Laci's body.
Why would he dump the body that somebody else has killed?
You see how ridiculous that is? That's exactly how your statement sounds, you assume the conclusion and then are surprised how your assumptions lead to the said conclusion.
@@volodyanarchist she never said somebody else did it. It's your comment that doesn't make sense.
@@dguarino6586 Wow. Are you serious. I am pointing out that Virginia Grassi in her comment has implied that nobody else could kill her... and your response is that VG has not said that somebody killed her.
Maybe if something is going over your head, learn to read.
But there was three independent witnesses that saw him getting onto the lake, and all of them said he has no body in the boat. Also, his boat is tiny, it was proven that it would completely capsize if anything heavy would be thrown over.
@@ilhamaaaram1874 where is that evidence? Where is that testimony?
The physical evidence, the GPS on his vehicle, placed him at the beach over 3 times where the bodies were found. And, that wasn't a place to fish nor hang out.
HA!! Hard evidence to prove his guilt.
He was there because Detective Grogan told Scott, Laci was in the bay and that is where they were searching.
Geragos, in his OS, revealed that Grogan called Scott on the 26th to tell him, "She's in the Bay, we're gonna find her." Geragos said that if Scott had not gone to the Bay, Grogan would have said Scott didn't care.
51 searches and not a single piece of evidence she was dumped in the bay.
@@aok4418 Her body was found in the bay. That's pretty good evidence for that.
@@Charlie-wl2qt No it isn't. His alibi was public.
GERAGOS: Okay. Now, when you talked to Boyd Stephens, he also told you and he was the San Francisco, or still is the San Francisco Medical Examiner. He told you that in cases previously where bodies have bloated with decomposition, that they pulled as much as eighty pounds of weight up with the body surfacing in the Bay, correct?
GROGAN: Yes.
GERAGOS: Okay. And, once again, you gave him, and this would have been on April 2nd, of 2003. You gave him the hypothetical of the chicken wire, right?
GROGAN: Yes, sir.
GERAGOS: Okay. And he told you that the water flow southbound was at four knots, right?
GROGAN: In one particular area we were talking about, yes.
GERAGOS: Okay. And he also said that, in his opinion, thirty pound of weights would not likely be enough to cause a female of that weight, especially wrapped in plastic causing additional buoyancy in the plastic to immediately go to the bottom, correct?
GROGAN: Yes, that's one of the things he said.
GERAGOS: And he said victim would likely have traveled with the currents for a considerable distance before any exposed weights could catch something on the bottom, or the current would allow the object to stay in one place long enough for the weights to begin to sink in the mud.
GROGAN: Yes. When talking about the Richmond Turning Basin area, there.
GERAGOS: If it had made it to deeper waters, it's possible the body would still be in pristine condition, right?
GROGAN: Yes, sir.
GERAGOS: Thank you. I have no further questions.
FLADAGER: I have,
JUDGE: No.
GERAGOS: That's it.
JUDGE: That's it. He's only been here seven days.
FLADAGER: I know.
JUDGE: I say that is the last go-around. That's it.
@@aok4418 I don't know why you posted such a long comment... it doesn't it anyway contradict what I said. Scott Peterson was at the sight where the bodies were later found.
I can't believe this is even being discussed. People saw a pregnant woman walking with a dog after a neighbour had put the Peterson's dog in the backyard. It wasn't his wife.
A man was sentenced to DEATH. The only thing he was guilty of was having an affair. The country owes this man a second look at this case WITHOUT the emotion that it was over 10 years ago.
You’re cutting him too much slack here. This case is just like the O.J Case. They did it and it’s glaringly obvious, with little to no room for denial.
I don’t know, OJ had a trail of blood leading from the victims to his bedroom. All the evidence against Scott Peterson is circumstantial.
@John D. Rockefeller , he went fishing at the same spot his wife’s dead body was found. How does that point away from him?
Kevin it was all over the news where he went fishing. Whoever killed her knew where to dump the body to make it look like Scott did it. There was evidence that the bodies weren’t in the water as long as they would have been if they’d been put there on December 24.
@@maryr3612 But none of that means Scott couldn’t have done it.
@@synysterjazmyngates it also doesn't mean he did. The standard is guilty beyond reasonable doubt. Not maybe.
Scott did change his story. He said he was golfing then said he was actually fishing
Actually that’s incorrect! He said he was going to go golfing and decided to go fishing instead
maybe he was both golfing and fishing in PARIS....::::ROLLING EYES:::
@@gailmarie65 He told Laci's sister he intended to go golfing on Christmas Eve. He told two of his neighbors he went golfing. He told Laci's relative he went golfing.
No that’s wrong.
@@ljmac22 Look it up.
Not JUST his demeanour made the investigators suspicious. The bucket and mop by the back door while he denied he had been doing any cleaning - but the mop was still wet. The fact that within a short time of arriving home and without making any enquiries with the neighbors, friends etc, he phoned Lacis mother and told her Laci was "missing". How did he know she was missing within an hour of arriving home?
@Sumridge Yes he did. It was the first thing he told Laci's mom on the phone. And I'd believe her over that lying sociopath any day.
When my brother passed from suicide I was in extreme shock and denial and just felt like I was in a fog. I did not cry right off. I just couldn't consciously believe it.
I am so sorry for your loss. 😿
Very sorry for your loss. You’re absolutely right that there is no “correct” way to behave after being traumatized.
Yes, sometimes it’s awhile for the experience to “sink in”. The loss is so devastating that one goes into shock & numbness immediately sets in. It really IS like becoming a zombie. You walk around seeing, hearing, but unfeeling, but remain in “autopilot” mode.
At some point reality sets in & it’s like a bomb hitting the ground that breaks through the fog surrounding your brain. THEN you can cry & let everything pour out of you. Sort of like a dam breaking.
I totally agree! I lost my partner bc of suicide 8 yrs ago, and I couldn't cry at first. Instead I was talking to the cops trying to explain to them that he couldn't be dead... Not really reasonable, I know 🤷🏼♀️ I am so sorry for your loss and hope you are doing ok . Kind regards from Germany ♥️🌈
I went into shock when my father suddenly died right in front of me when I was 16. People couldn't understand why I did not cry--I felt frozen and could barely speak.
I think the fact that she was found 90 miles away, in a body of water he admitted going fishing, is pretty damning. I mean seriously, any other individual murdering her would have left her elsewhere. He was cheating, telling Amber his fantasy-land tales, acting rather indifferent to Laci missing, and a myriad of other things. I understand and can accept the misreading his behavior or attitude. As you said, everyone acts different. I can even understand him trying to run away if he felt he was going to be arrested, if innocent. However, he just did too many things that were contradictory to a innocent person, and I even heard that he removed Laci Peterson missing person fliers. For me, despite the lack of forensic evidence, the fact that she was found in that body of water is too convenient. Eye witnesses are nearly worthless. He easily could have strangled her like Chris Watts then taken her to that body of water and cut her up there.
No doubt it looks bad for him. His behavior was not indicative of intelligence. With that in mind, I wonder how he did not leave any physical evidence. There are different types of intelligence though.
It's very common that murderers will put as much distance from the initial crime scene and themselves to establish their alibi and attempting to avoid accountability. Again, this would be only one element of a case that the investigators would look at, while investigating everything else. No matter how insignificant it is or where it leads.
Any inconsistencies in truth are greatly magnified, when a crime of this magnitude occurs.
The police released his alibi so it would have been easy for the killer(s) to frame him. They also found a body in the same area a few years ago cut from the torso similar to laci's body.
Think Evelyn Hernandez & basically a planted body in that bay has already happened 6 mos before Laci & Connor was found..Look, the odds are that the body was planted by someone other than Scott..Why? Just what I mentioned..Someone already used ocean water already as a way to wash DNA in that same bay to plant a body..So it proves someone has already used the Bay to plant a body.....Think about it..Just 6 mos before , someone obviously planted Evelyn Hernandez & her child in the same bay with missing hands & feet & head as Connor & Laci found 6 mos later & in August of 2002 ..Scott didn't even know Amber Frey then..She was found in the bay in the exact same fashion as Connor & Laci..And Janey Peterson has a letter written & mailed on Dec 27th from someone who was concerned that now the media & police revealed where he was that someone will dump the body there to put it on Scott..In other words to say, it's hardly likely someone would dump that body..Basically the body of Evelyn Hernandez shows it has akready been done..That's why I know someone would go at links to pin it on Scott..Because someone obviously dumped Evelyn Hernandez there ..In other word ,it's been done already..
@sumridge I know..People say these lowlifes wont go 90 miles to dump a body..I say Evelyn Hernandez & her child missing hand,feet & head in the same fashion as Connor & Laci & was already obviously dumped in that same bay & only 6 mos before Laci & Connor was found only 6 mos before.Ocean water is a good DNA avoidance so to speak..For some reason,people must think OJ & this case was alike..Who knows..Like police planted blood in OJ's Bronco and no one would plant a body in the Bay....There is no comparison..There were numerous lies by the detectives as you & me knew..But .I keep saying look, someone already has planted a body there & in the same fashion as Connor & Laci and only 6 mos before..In other words,it has already been done
I agree that there are no right ways to act to traumatic events,but I believe there are wrong ways to act.if that makes sense
it really doesn't. there is nothing as weird as people.
@@jonnylumberjack6223 yeah Jack,nut jobs are plentiful
I agree. A person in grief of anyone, especially a wife and helpless baby may react by holding in emotions which might seem like they don't care, while some wear their heart on their sleeves. However, a person in grief doesn't usually have a surge in libido (his cable bill showed a lot of xxx movies purchased & calling amber to tell her sweet nothings), lack of motivation to help look (he just stood and watxhed a lot) and quickly concluding they're not coming back by selling home and flushing your old life...🤔
@@monicapyle I disagree about the libido thing. It is well known that having sex can be a way of being totally alive, totally human, a way to reject death. I'm not a very sociable person but I shagged for Scotland after I lost my sister. I got the horn in a big way. People are both very basic and quite weird.
And I'm female, if that makes any odds! Blokes hardly need an 'excuse'!!
He's a married man who had an affair,. He has a history of deception. I think it's more likely that an adulterous husband is the culprit than a stranger with no motive.
No motive that we know of.
@Abundant Places
Burglars wouldn't take her out in the water to end up on the shore like that. More like dump her in the woods.
Nancy Fahey you realize the Modesto police held a press conference giving away Scott’s Alibi on tv right ? “Scott was fishing here on the day of her disappearance”.
@@lastupenda3049 stupid
@Abundant Places i lived in one of the roughest neighborhoods in the Boston area..trust me, crime was TARGETED at certain people due to their CONNECTION with said people and not random as in what you are trying to imply
I discovered your channel a few months ago and I've watched about a dozen of your videos now. I really appreciate your objective, rational approach and commentary. Your insight, in this video especially, about how there is no "right" way for a person to react during an interrogation and how cops aren't like the mythical James Bond character was enlightening. You also mentioned how people laugh for all kinds of reasons and I wanted to add that some people, myself included, sometimes laugh when they are nervous or uncomfortable. I had to appear in court once as a witness in a robbery and assault case. (I was driving home late one night after work and saw a guy beating and kicking another guy who was curled in a fetal position on the sidewalk so I called the police to report it.) I had never been to court other than for an occasional speeding ticket over the years so to be called up to the stand and sworn in was so odd. I don't know if it was because I was so uncomfortable or what but I couldn't stop smiling and was even laughing a little in front of everyone. I was mortified obviously but couldn't control it. I remember apologizing and saying it was nerves. I'm grateful that I must have appeared credible in every other way because the guy ended up getting convicted and taken off the streets. It was a humbling experience for sure.
I agree with you. He could be guilty, but I don't think we have enough /actual/ evidence to give him the death penalty. His behavior is odd, but a personality shouldn't be considered evidence.
it's not his personality that tells us he's guilty. it's his behavior and that sure as fuck can tell us he's guilty. Example, innocent people don't get fake documents in their brother's name to escape to mexico
@@sl7883 that's speculation why he did that though. If he's feeling like the police have decided he's the only option and wont look elsewhere he would also try and escape. That's also speculation though, we'll never know his motive unless he confesses to everything, which even then could be coerced by police. Does it look suspicious? Yes. Like most of the things he did. But I still wouldn't call it evidence.
@@flannelpower2424 : not every capitol punishment execution is a slam dunk like "the rape & murder of a 90 year old Nun, with a minimum of 3 stab wounds". I've heard law enforcement comment before, about "circumstantial evidence" being ironclad more than we think it does.
Personality isn't something people can ignore, so of course jurors are going to consider it, whether they mean to or not. I'm sure those jurors easily noticed that Scott was a narcissist, a compulsive liar, low on empathy, and someone who cheats and hides things. How can this kind of personality not factor into another person's judgment and intuition?
@@jonesy2892 because it's not facts
I believe you are the most thoughtful man I've ever listened to. I subscribed
Yep. 100% agree. He's my new favorite
100,% agree.
Love how professional and objective Dr. Grande is but also uses common sense
he really is and I watched him regularly. I like the way he reads us two sides and theories
No way this guy is nuts he’s always yelling about people in his voice is super annoying and he’s losing his hair. We are talking about Dr. Phil right?
Watch the ABC interview where Scott said Laci "was" and quickly corrected himself and said "is". He knew she was not coming home and a little bit of truth slipped out.
Is this damning evidence to put a man behind bars? What about the 11 eye witnesses that saw laci after Scott left? Did they see a ghost or perhaps another pregnant with the same exact dog breed in this small neighborhood?
@@RiceBowl510 no one saw Laci.
Ah, the classic "past-tense" gotcha moment. Death by grammar.
I'm definitely not saying Scott is innocent, but caution should be exercised when trying to analyze behavior. Any credible behavioral scientist will tell you that there are no "absolutes" when it comes to "tells". It's a fallacy. A baseline of an individuals typical behavior and speech pattern needs to be established prior to analyzing them. Using past tense is something to note, but on its own, it does not prove anything as there are other factors that could explain why someone would do that. These kind of observations can be effective tools to utilize in investigations or interrogations. Not as definitive evidence of guilt or innocence.
You’re leaving out the fact that he was telling Amber that he was in Paris while at the vigil, also he told her that he was a widower before he (allegedly) killed them. Also let’s not forget that he made Conner’s room a “storage” room to dump whatever, soon after they disappeared... With all my respect, I think you’re being way too conservative in your analysis. Cheers from a fan :)
liar and murderer are two different things.... but if a cheat gets caught in his own web.... (Do not be deceived. God will not be made a fool. For a person will reap what he sows, Gal 6:7)
I thought the same thing. The moral of the story is dont commit adultery and you won't be punished.
It's interesting how you decide something like guilt or not in some unrelated objective questions by how you feel about lying and cheating in some relationship. You're one of the reasons why, if I was on trial for a crime I didn't commit, I'd try to keep every woman off my jury.
@@inTruthbyGrace So... what is your lesson here? If he was cheating in sexual relationships then its just fine if he gets mistaken as the murderer and jailed for life. Warped!
@@jonathandewberry289
Had he not been cheating, he wouldn't have been punished. Bottom line. He wouldn't have even looked guilty. His own personal sin condemned him.
Scotty Boy told his sweetie his wife was dead. LIAR!!
Petersons a pig even If he didn't do it. I think he did do it.
Well, he's not wrong there.
One coukd say telling her she was home, barefoot and pregnant wouldn't bode well in his efforts to seduce the mistress...so whatever he told her would be a lie unless it was exactly that...I personally think he is an odd duck...there certainly is a huge piece of this saga missing imo.
Thank you for pointing out that we don't have a single way to react to a stressful situation.
After his arrest, and moments after learning that the bodies had been positively identified as his wife and son, Scott Peterson hit an In&Out Burger and wolfed down a double double with cheese, a small fry and a vanilla shake.
That's not normal behavior.
@@sophie8394 I bet he drank something with that burger. And perhaps breathed as well... Monster!
I bet you would stop eating if somebody you cared for died, maybe surviving by putting your own fecies back inside with a plunger.
🤣🤣🤣
but the bodies were place around the same location he was"fishing"that speaks volumes
No they weren’t they were found washed up on a rocky shore
He didn’t go fishing at the San Francisco beach where Conner was found or one mile out where they found lacies torso. No saying he’s innocent just saying they didn’t find them where he went fishing
The news announced where he had been. Which means someone could have dumped them there way after the fact to pile on the evidence.
The news was reporting where he was the morning she went missing so it would be easy for someone to place the bodies there after the fact.
joan baczek ......In the exact same location he told the cops he was fishing. He even produced a parking receipt.
I've always looked at "improper" grief behavior not as an anomaly amongst grieving people, but a commonality amongst people who caused the death they're pretending to grieve. SOME regular people react like Peterson; men who kill their romantic partners OFTEN do.
Absolutely agree with you
Good point well made.
Its a very similar situation like with Chris Watts.Whrn there is infidelity, usually it can either end up in a passionate murder or not...but they should keep digging in more further and prove he wanted to be in his affair and it hard to believe how little discoveries ,with so many tecnology .Its pretty doubtful.Are they defending him in all ways possible.He wants to get out just lime Chriss Watts....
Name one.
I agree. However, I found Scott's forced tears in conjunction with his blatant lying and lack of remorse quite frightening.
Dr. Grande, just happened upon your case analysis of Scott Peterson (I really hate that we concentrate on murders instead of the victims but the scrutiny is all about him not her, so). Can't wait to dig in tonight, my usual down time when I enjoy your work. I've also seen in the beginning your content was quite different and definitely will spend time there. Thanks for your knowledge and effort.
I've read several comments, and I appreciate that folks care enough to offer their thoughts. However, this man isn't declaring or defending the Innocence of Scott Peterson. He's reacting to an already established verdict, and offering a possible alternative perspective. I discovered this channel tonight. I'm relieved to have found a person who can give me legitimate insight into human behavior, without closing his segment with a make-up tutorial. It's ironic how presumptuous folks can react to a True Crime segment.
No, he actually said he is siding on the view that he didn't kill Lacy. Which is freakin nuts!
@@joeking433 Oh. He certainly didn't change my mind. I believe Scott Peterson is probably guilty. He also wasn't consistently accurate. Some of the 11 witnesses he stated "saw Laci Peterson" actually said they saw a pregnant woman walking a larger-breed dog. If I'm starting to learn about a case I'd prefer to watch something like this than Nancy Grace barking nonsense, though.
@@estellagrace7025 Sometimes guilty defendants are found guilty even without strong evidence that they committed the crime. OTOH, some people innocent of the crime they're accused of are wrongly found guilty.
I've rarely seen a person wrongly found guilty of a crime that didn't do something that deserved incarceration at other times in their life. IOW, If you live a clean life your chances of incarceration are very, very low. If you involve yourself in criminality in your life you will probably be found guilty and incarcerated even if you didn't do the particular crime you're accused of. There's a lesson there!
@@joeking433 Why do you think they have groups like the Innocence Project? There is no such thing as "I've rarely seen a person wrongly found guilty of a crime that didn't do something that deserved incarceration at other times in their life. IOW, If you live a clean life your chances of incarceration are very, very low." Many are convicted wrongfully and exonerated decades later because of DNA. A month ago, a man was wrongfully found guilty and incarcerated after 30 years. DNA finally caught up with him and he is free. No DNA match...the criminal is still on the loose.
@@RainCloud848 It's really rare that a criminal is punished for something he didn't do. Far less than 1% of all convictions. And all of those guys that were wrongly convicted were probably convicted based on their prior criminal record. So you can bet that they were finally getting punished for crimes they got away with if not the crime they were charged with.
Why do I think there are groups like the Innocence Project? Because they are after fame and fortune. Either that or they are just dumb bleeding heart liberals.
What about the six people that saw Lacy walking the dog AFTER Scott left?
Is that the number today? I thought it was 14. Seems to change every day.
No one saw Laci. No one.
@@sophie8394 The witnesses are documented. Some of the remaining witnesses and details were not known about by the defense until the trial or even after the trial.
@@jwait1496 🤣🤣🤣 sure.
Prosecutor here. Eye witness testimony has been proven to be some of the most unreliable evidence at a trial. That’s why many people who have been wrongly convicted and later exonerated by DNA were convicted based upon eye witness testimony. I’m not saying it doesn’t have any value or is never accurate or helpful, I’m just saying that I wouldn’t put much stock into it when compared to the bulk of the evidence against Scott Peterson. For example, when someone goes missing and police put up flyers and go on the news with a photo of the victim, they will be the first to tell you that they get so many false sightings that they are required to track down. I wouldn’t be surprised if that were the case here. People want to be helpful, but they are human after all.
I think the guys in the van had something to do with her disappearance.. the witness said it was the 24th yet the police insisted it was the 26th... incredible... and the watch at the pawn shop that was pawned by a member of the roberery gang... also the police TOLD the world where Scott was fishing... what a perfect place to eventually dump her body... let's them off the hook. Also notice WHEN they washed up... months after she disappeared... in a bay teaming with all kinds of ocean life would have DESTROYED her body.
There were no "guys in the van"
The burglary was on the 26th
The pawned watch was not Laci's
Her body WAS destroyed
Jesus Christ 🙄
This reminds me of the Sam Shepard case. It wasn't just bad science, and the police, but the press which convicted Peterson before he was even charged.
That's what people who don't know the facts say.
He was so guilty!
His behavior convinced him!
@@kevinchambers1101 Except the press taints the minds of the jurors prior to them actually hearing the evidence.
@@sophie8394 You can know the facts and still think the press made it incredibly hard for him to get a not guilty verdict.
@@TheMattTrakker do you think that potential jurors aren't capable of thinking independently and making a decision based on the evidence shown?
This isn't the first case to receive intense media attention.
A couple of good examples - OJ and Casey Anthony. Both walked.
Scott Lee Peterson, Chris Lee Watts...
I'll never date a guy whose middle name is Lee.
Barry Lee Morphew ......
Arthur Lee Allen...the Zodiac Killer
I think a seasoned detective with years in the business knows more about human behavior than most therapist. This comes from years of forced interaction with therapist for my children. My 10 year old son could play every therapist he had over 7 years, and ther were several, like ther were putty. No cop bought into his stories but every therapist did and they were wrong. He just told them what he thought he thought they wanted to hear and he was right 99% of the time. But not law enforcement, they warned me before hand what he would say they were right.
These cops were incompetent.
The leas detective in this case admitted he didn't investigate leads and sighting because " Laci sightings were not a priority". Any detective who doesn't think sightings should be investigated in a missing person's case should be working at Walmart.
The MPD should have done their jobs. They refused follow the actual evidence, tips and sightings that points in a completely different direction. The media spun everything and that's the way police wanted it.
He was seen at the marina by three people. Does it sound logical that a guy is going to kill his wife and take the chance of dumping her body in broad daylight. He needs to back the boat down the ramp and leave it there for anyone to see in broad daylight including anyone from the hundreds of people that live on their boats all year round.
There was no forensic evidence, eyewitnesses, video surveillance etc ever proving the States theory. Even the SF Medical examiner (Boyd Stevens) explained to 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.
-Conner (baby) 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 determined the baby could have even been alive as far along as Jan 14th.
-Conner was found above the high tide line and water break.
-The baby's left ear was permanently flattened against the head and a rectangular piece of material was over his ear.
-Plastic wrap knotted around his neck that had to be cut off, not far from a plastic bag which was never tested.
-The criminologist and medical examiner, both concluded that the twine could not have wrapped around Conner’s neck accidentally. Dr. Cyril Wecht noted, "never in a million years."
-Laci had a missing neck that is not consistent with any known disarticulation in aqueous environments.
-Laci's uterus was at least 10 cm (3.9") smaller than it should have been, explaining 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.
Well, your thoughts could be wrong. Why would you be forced to have interactions with a therapist for your children? I don't think that he was playing them. I think that you're just exaggerating.
The guy was arrested just before he could head to the hills, (and eventually Mexico), with 15 grand and 12 Viagra tabs.....innocent I think not!
MELJAY36 you’re misguided about this case. That is not what happened.
Checkout 3:30...….Misguided? I think not!
Did he have a map to amber Frey’s job? Among other items
If I was being accused (and soon to be arrested) I'd entertain the idea of getting outta dodge too! Not saying Scott is innocent, just saying it's not that far fetched for innocent people to want to flee.
@@britanny5363ify
That is exactly what happened, YOU are misguided...
Why did he try to run? I consider ‘this as an admission of guilt.
Maybe he felt like he was being railroaded and didn't think he'd get a fair trial, especially after Gloria Allred showed up with his other significant other.
Tell the OJ jury that.
fikhanmd Yes, he should have been out there searching for them like a normal person.
He didn't run. He was heading North. Was he taking the scenic route to Mexico.
@@jenniferholden9397 You mean like the police who ignored sightings and leads to search a bay where she was never dumped.
I do think Scott was guilty here, but I can absolutely vouch for people reacting in weird ways - I was told I had stage 4 cancer, 5" tumour in my chest, I might not make it. The first thing I remember after the doctor left my room was "are there any doritos left?" 😭
I have this one rule in cases like this: emotions don't determine guilt.
Also I hope you're doing good.
@@panpani5079 Totally agreed! And I am, thank you - 4 years cancer free now! 🙏
@@nisas.5628 WOW, YOU MADE MY DAY!!!
BTW, look up the first person to swim the English Channel four times without stopping. This you have got to see! ;)
My friends love of his life drowned in front of the family on her birthday at the beach….at his house before the funeral, the females were arguing about what clothes they will wear to the funeral. My friend turned to me and said …”what does it matter what we wear……let’s go with board shorts and a surf board”…. Then laughed.
He loved her with all his heart.
God bless
The innocence project just took Scott Peterson's case, you give a reasoned and well thought out explanation, in looking at the facts, it does not seem possible the crime was committed in the way that the police said it was. This does not mean he did not do it, but he defiantly did not receive a fair trial.
What was unfair about his trial with his million dollar celebrity attorney?
What does the cost of his attorney have to do with it? The government lied about the date of the burglary across the street, lied about his wife not going to his warehouse, used invalid dog evidence, and improper testimony about the age of the infant at death. Numerous creatable people saw a woman matching the wife and dog out walking after Scott was at work. Let them convict him in a fair trial.
@@jailhelper8392most people don't have the privilege of hiring such an attorney, that's what it has to do with it. He had the best defense money could buy at the time.
The Supreme Court of California affirmed the fairness of his trial in 2020.
I would disagree with your final comment. The ideal is that it is better to let ten guilty people go free than to convict one innocent person. However, increasingly it is most important to the police to quickly find a viable suspect, find evidence to support his guilt, in some cases, to suppress exculpatory evidence. For the prosecutor, the important thing is to get a conviction. For the judge, the important thing is to get a resolution and get to the next case in a timely manner. The system is not set up so that any of those parties might take a deep look at the possible innocence of the person on trial. In many cases, the defendants only hope is to have the resources to hire investigators, evidence experts, and, of course, a capable and experienced attorney whose best hope is to muddy the waters so the jury cannot reach a unanimous agreement on guilt.
Scott Peterson did hire experts, his defense paid over 100k to investigators and he had a million dollar celebrity attorney. They definitely tried to muddy the water. This jury didn't fall for it.
Eleven people saw LP alive after he is confirmed gone. The prison phone call. No history of violence jumps to murdering his wife and unborn son??? If someone is going to dump a body in the bay; who would try thar in a small boat on a public ramp in broad daylight? " Oh the bag?? It's my enormous and heavy bait bag".
Sounds like you've been watching the Peterson family documentary.
I think the evidence against Peterson was considerably stronger than you have stated here. This was a local case so most people here in the Bay Area heard more details of the prosecutor’s case, and there were many more incidents that support his guilt. Many are excellently discussed in previous comments here, so I won’t restate them.
I read in an article, Scott was at his sister's house, just hanging out while people where out looking for Lacy. Supposedly, Scott was hitting on his sister's babysitter during the search.
Chew Chewy it’s lies...
@@ksmith4846
True. I think I read it in a crime magazine. If your interested, you maybe be able to google the info, not sure.
here's a link to one article I found.... nypost.com/2005/02/24/sister-reveals-sleazy-scotts-weird-ways/
That's right! He was on the phone with his mistress while at a vigil for his missing wife and child. That's not just a atypical behavior it's a major red flag!
He sister believed he did it.
Shauna Luangraj he tried to trick amber into not knowing he was the Scott Peterson making headlines. That’s why he talked to her at the vigil. Why? Because he KNEW once it became known that he was having an affair that everyone would think he was responsible. He was right. Scott Peterson was convicted of murder bc he was having an affair. It’s insane.
Yes, there’s two things that convince me of his guilt. First, if a man tells his new girlfriend that his wife has tragically died and they then share this very personal and painful conversation, how can he ever turn back and recant that moment without her realizing what a horrible person he is. The second thing was when he told Sharon after a few hours had passed that Laci was “missing “. We don’t even use that word when we can’t find the remote!
"I have nothing against the dogs I'm sure they were nice dogs..."
😂😂 Love your videos Dr!
So he's in love with a new woman, decides to go fishing on a 3 hour round trip for less than an hour on the water. Then comes home and his heavily pregnant wife is missing. He's talking to this new woman about starting a new life with her. He shows no emotion or worry about his missing wife and even wants to stay out of the media.
Then his wife is found dumped in the same place he went fishing.
That's beyond reasonable doubt.
You did not even cover prosecution! 3 non family witnesses on scene of her disappearance who said Scott had first claimed he went golfing
He said during the interrogation that he originally planned to go golfing but it being to cold decided to go fishing. When the cops asked if he was trolling he said “yes a little bit.” Which makes sense because fish are not as active in colder water but while trolling the moving water from the boat excites the fish (meaning they become more active) and are more likely to bite the bait.
You can always tell a guilty person from when they could give two shits if their spouse is missing or possibly dead. Chris watts, Scott Peterson, every time
What they didn’t say to the public was that the baby was found with a noose around his neck. Not something that could happen in the water. Tight around his neck and tied. How could the ocean tie a noose around the neck like a sailors knot? Couldn’t happen. Another pregnant woman was killed skiing with her child in a satanic ritual a month prior. The burglars while on the phone discussed Lacy confronting them- one time the other “shut up they could be recording this”. That is a game changer. The reason they lied about the date is because they placed her in the van and kidnapped her. A man reported seeing the van with a woman that looked pregnant peeing on the side of the road. I was a die hard Scott Peterson killed his wife. I watched a recent documentary on the evidence not presented to the jury or the public- I think he was probably shitting his pants cuz he told his mistress this was his first Christmas without his wife and then it actually comes true. Talk about dumb luck. Or maybe he hired the burglars to be there in hopes Lacy would confront them and then they could kidnap and kill her. Ya right.
Ahhhhh. You've been watching the Peterson family documentary 🙄
I think you've got some valid points regarding the faulty thinking process used by the police. This happens more frequently than we want to acknowledge and has/can lead to wrongful convictions.
Doc, can you talk about the judge when he decided not to mention the 14 unsolved deaths of women in that area and some killed are pregnant women ?
14? Is that the number now? Why don't you post everything you know about these women? I'm sure you've done extensive research.
Ps...the judge doesn't present evidence in a trial 🤣🤣🤣
I really don’t think he’s guilty
I was on the fence for the longest time about his guilt or innocence. Until I saw Stephanie Harlowe’s 4? Part video series on this case where she states Scott had not gone fishing in years before that Christmas Eve, bought the boat weeks before and no one can validate Laci actually knew about the boat, got a 2-day fishing license for 12/24 and 12/25 (when a year license is not much more $ but I realize it’s the end of the year), AND most importantly after discovering Laci was missing Scott told the neighbors he went golfing that morning, not fishing. After he has supposedly gone fishing. So why lie. Lie so much. About everything. I hope he is guilty because now he has to pay the price but it definitely seems like more than likely he did do it imo. Now that being said I do believe in the death penalty for deserving offenders but don’t think the evidence is sufficient in this case for that sentence.
The neighbor across the street from Lacy's home said Lacy always opened her blinds in the morning. And that morning Of 12/24 Lacy did not open the blinds. In the book Lacy's mother wrote, the mother noticed very odd behavior as the family was sitting down to eat a spaghetti dinner at Lacy's mothers home. Scott said Lacy would be really bothered about some coat that should have not been placed where it should be placed. Also when Scott called to report Lacy wasn't at home; Lacy's mother thought the way he told her was in the past tense. As though Lacy was gone for good. Scott refused the help of John Walsh whose little boy was kidnapped and murdered. John Walsh had years of television broadcasts that solve alot of criminal cases. John Walsh believed he could help Scott get the publicity and get some hot tips on call ins to John Walsh's investigative team. John Walsh couldn't fathom why Scott refused. Scott going fishing for Sturgeon that wasn't the time of year to fish for. Scott could have planted Lacey some other location he could drive to. Cut her up and put her in the cooler. Then took the boat at the dock where he could be seen with an empty boat. Then go back to the cooler with her. body and dump it further out and that is why Lacy and Connor washed to shore in an unusual out of the normal current that would of been suspected. Scott thought he brought the cooler and weighed it down enough. But his plan failed. He cut her up in the woods near the water somewhere and brought the saw by car. Just stating my theory and why there wasn't any blood found at the home or where he kept his boat.
@@karenalberini9205 yeah I’m not sure exactly what happened but it’s too many coincidences to say he wasn’t involved. Geragos, Scott’s first lawyer would probably say he didn’t want John Walsh’s help bc he was a cheater, which is why he tried to avoid the Media and spotlight initially. But Idc if you’re cheating or not, shouldn’t your missing wife take priority over an affair you’re having, if she’s truly missing an you’re not involved. Idk about the cooler theory, idk how he dumped the body at the lake that day but somehow someway Laci was murdered and Scott did not have a solid alibi and his story kept changing. It just doesn’t make sense.
Capital punishment w 1 appeal wld straighten up this country! We re now have more lawlessness thnx to denorats. They love murderers.
Absolutely a sociopath. A pathological liar.
What type of clothing was found on Laci’s body when recovered? One theory is that Scott killed Laci the night of the 23rd, by drowning her in their swimming pool. It would explain why there was no sign of a struggle and why the blinds remained closed.
Didn’t Scott tell Amber he lost his wife before she actually went missing? That’s quite a coincidence...
'Yes, but there are different ways of losing your wife'
sa Scott cried when he said to amber he lost his wife therefore s logical assumption is through death
Kasia yes not everybody that intimates that their wife died, also not everybody who purchases a boat the day after saying that or the same day, not everybody’s wife lands up dead in the same place as where the boat landed up, not everybody reacts the way he did, not everybody etc etc no single piece of evidence is overwhelming but the accumulation thereof - he did it
A coincidence is something that's not planned or arranged but seems like it is. Technically, a coincidence is an occurrence of events that happen at the same time by total accident.....
So what?
It might literally just be a coincidence.
I mean the death sentence is a HELL of a deal if it were merely a coincidence. COINCIDENCES do occur, that's why there's a name for it.
If that's all it takes to convict and sentence to death, people should have their heads examined.
I personally think most people are lacking in intelligence to be a part of juror duty. Their not smart enough to understand reasonable doubt. So many times there have been cases that should have been NOT GUILTY via reasonable doubt. Doesn't mean he didn't do it. But we should be able to prove it more than an affair, an a coincidence, and a feeling.
But that's people, authority says he did it, so he did it. Especially if it's a young woman. Rarely will someone be acquitted of a charge of murder when it's a young attractive woman. Even with pathetic evidence.
@Winnie the Wine Mom
so why dont you chang your jurstic system which cleary show that it does not work ??? and the thing that i dont understand has an outsider is this why in hell is Casey Anthony and oj simpson and many others like them with stronge evidence against them are set free and Scoot petterson with out a single shreed of evdince zero evidence is sitting in death row ??? why does the american system give the power to convict a person or let him free to a punch of jurors like strawberry shortcake who don't know nothing about law or evidence and only listen to the media like opra and Nancy Grace and the view because your a lazzy nation
I got a call from work that my much beloved Mom had unexpectedly passed away. I went to her house and the caretaker and police were there. Caretaker was like family and she was upset because they questioned her. The Sargent took me aside and said they questioned her because she was crying and sometimes if someone does wrong they cry from feelings of guilt. Interesting how emotions can thus not be used as facts for evidence- as they vary too much. Meanwhile, I didn't cry at first. I was numb 💔
// I appreciate. Thanks for sharing.
Todd said the Police's job is to collect evidence and find the truth. I think cops are sometimes more interested in getting a conviction than finding the truth. This is probably doubly true when a case gets lots of media attention.
I lost my chickens when I got that call😭😭😭💔
I’m introverted and it takes time to process things for me. It would all be a matter of circumstances on reactions like if my kids were in the room, was I alone, am I speaking to professionals like police, etc etc. I disagree with the whole police being able to make assumptions based on reactions or people being “nervous” around police. I think anyone would be, especially in an already heightened emotional state.
Also, Valia I am so sorry for your loss! My mom passed away almost 11 years ago at just 54 years old and there are still days I cry missing her, especially now that I live 5 minutes from where she lived since we were away for 18 years until my ex left me so I no longer was living the military life with him moving around wherever the Air Force sent us.
If I don't know where my husband is and i call his relatives, i ask if they've seen him. I don't say he's missing. There was no reason to think she was missing.
Unless you already know that she isn't coming back!"
I would say someone is missing if I was looking for them
Thank you. If I had been away from my husband and kids 12 hours and came home to them gone, my first thought would be that they are visiting family not missing. He also didn’t call her to ask where she was.
All of his behavior and the evidence points to Scott. If he’s innocent he is the most unlucky man by a lot.
@@nicolai6161 but that doesn't mean they ARE missing just because you are looking for them. They could be right around the corner.
@Susan Fudge.. And Scott didn't even call the police to report her "missing". He called her parents and THEY reported it. That's another reason the police were suspicious of him from the start. Then he called his girlfriend Amber Frey on New Years Eve a few days later and told her that he was in Paris watching a wonderful fireworks show when actually he was at a candlelight vigil for his missing wife. I believe he is an "evil" man, if there is such a thing, or at least a narcissistic sociopath/ psychopath---he and Chris Watts could be brothers. They are both narcissistic and they both have sociopathic behavior.
I don't believe people when they say they saw someone from a missing poster. This happened to a friend of mine when her sister was missing. People came out of the woodwork saying they saw R in a vehicle, driving a vehicle, or walking along a road, and later we found out that R was already dead during the time people swore that they saw her. She had been killed by the father of her children & her body was buried in a shallow grave during the time people said they saw her. The same thing happened with Shanann Watts and her daughters. They were reported as being seen in Walmart when, in fact, they were dead & buried or disposed of. Idk why people do this, but I suspect it has something to do with attention.
That Walmart lady really did resemble Shanann! They just did not know about Nate's camera.
And McStay family, I remember that
Your observation is very important and I hope media and detectives note this as people who claim to have seen victims are often attention seekers & very sick & selfish people!
So sorry to hear your story of dreadful loss. 🙏
Some of them have a sincere desire to help though they are wrong about the sightings
The fact that her and the baby's bodies were found close to where he'd been fishing was just too much for me to ignore. I suppose if someone knew he always fished there someone could have killed her and planted her body there,but that would be assuming a lot.
It's all the things Scott did: ordered porn while they were searching for Laci, selling lacis vehicle, turning the nursery into a storage room, telling Amber he's in France when he's at a vigil for Laci, lacis body turning up right where Scott went fishing in a boat no one knew he bought, telling Amber he lost his wife before she was lost, that solidifies Scott's guilt.
God help you if you do all those things and someone else kills your wife.
Just a thought, but could he have thought his wife found out about the affair and left. Maybe hoping he would follow her. I don't know, but people do all sorts of stupid things. A friend of mine left her family for a couple of weeks and didn't tell anyone where she was. Her husband called the cops after 3 days, no one thought she was dead or anything. But it was allot of drama. I don't know anything about these 2 people, so I can't say what either of them would be capable of. Just a thought.
@Paul Avery Laci knew about it.
GERAGOS: Detective, she specifically told you that Ron, that Laci did not like Ron Grantski, as she called him, said Sharon's boyfriend, correct?
GROGAN: That's what she said.
GERAGOS: She said Laci doesn't like him. She didn't want her mother or he to know about the affair at all. Isn't that what she told you?
GROGAN: That's what she told me.
GERAGOS: She said that, said Laci was very adamant about that. That's why he protected that, instead of being up front and that kind of thing; is that correct?
GROGAN: That's what she said.
GERAGOS: She said that Scott said that Laci was extremely, or very pissed off. That's what he told her, right?
GROGAN: Yes.
GERAGOS: And that the, and they were going to get through it, but that she was, Laci was upset, right?
GROGAN: Yes.
GERAGOS: And she said that Scott said that Laci had insisted they not tell the parents about it, correct?
GROGAN: Yes, that's what Ann said.
GERAGOS: And you said that Laci was pissed off, but they had been through it before, correct? And said her answer was, right, she was not happy. But he said, you know, they talked it over, you know. They were going to, going to get through it. They were looking forward to Conner being born. She went on. It was kind of putting it on the back burner; is that correct?
GROGAN: Yes, that's what she said.
GERAGOS: Then you specifically asked, I'm at 36929, about the fact of what else Scott talked about, correct?
GROGAN: Yes.
GERAGOS: Okay. And you were, and this was an investigative technique that you used with a lot of witnesses. Have you talked to Scott Peterson? What did he say? How did he look, correct? Did this with a lot of his friends. For instance, Aaron Fritz, Mike Richardson, Greg Reed. That was something that both you and Detective Brocchini were doing, correct?
GROGAN: All those people were interviewed. And I think I have talked to some of them myself, yes.
GERAGOS: Some of them have been talked to by other of the Core Detectives in the group, correct?
GROGAN: Correct.
GERAGOS: And when you asked her about what else he talked about. She said he just keeps hoping and praying that she's, that she'll appear. That she said, I did know he sold Laci's car because the locks didn't work on it. He said when the police went through the car, through her car, the locks were damaged. And he wanted, I think, Brent to bring the car back, or have it fixed, or something. That what they told you?
GROGAN: That's what they told me.
GERAGOS: She said that he said, that Laci called the car a piece of shit, and hated the car, correct?
GROGAN: Yes.
GERAGOS: Okay. And she actually wanted the same car that Ann has; is that correct? Is that right?
GROGAN: Yes.
GERAGOS: And she said that they had been shopping around for a different car, and that he needed to turn that car in for those reasons; and, also, because he needed a truck, and he had asked several times to get his truck back, and he couldn't get it back, right?
GROGAN: Correct.
GERAGOS: Okay. And you know that at that point you still had the truck, correct?
GROGAN: Yes.
GERAGOS: Now, you also had an interview with Sharon Rocha and Ron Grantski on December 29th of 2002, correct? I'm looking at 2212 Bates stamp.
FLADAGER: 2212?
GROGAN: Yes, I did.
GERAGOS: During that interview with Sharon Rocha and Ron Grantski you learned, and you talked to two, just the two of them, right?
GROGAN: Yes.
GERAGOS: And you learned then that Laci did want a larger home and a new vehicle, correct?
GROGAN: Yes.
GERAGOS: In fact, I had asked you about this on Thursday, one of the tips you received on the tip line in May was from a real estate broker in San Luis Obispo; is that correct?
GROGAN: This is a tip? This is May, 2003.
GERAGOS: Tip came in in May, 2003, about something that occurred back in May of 2002, correct?
GROGAN: Yes. This is a tip that is written in a report by Detective Brocchini.
GERAGOS: Okay. I'm asking, did this tip involve a real estate broker from San Luis Obispo who specifically had had conversations with Laci Peterson in May of 2002?
GROGAN: I'm not familiar with that.
GERAGOS: With this report?
FLADAGER: Do you have a Bates stamp, Mr. Geragos?
GERAGOS: Bates stamp is 22363.
GROGAN: Yes.
GERAGOS: 369. I'm sorry. Were you aware of the fact that Laci had been calling a broker in San Luis Obispo about relocating there?
GROGAN: If I was told that, I don't remember it right now.
GERAGOS: You know there has been testimony in this case, and I believe specifically some of the, in some of the reports about Scott selling the car. Didn't you also call Sharon Rocha and tell her when the car was sold?
GROGAN: Yes, I did.
GERAGOS: Okay. Didn't she tell you at the time that the car had no sentimental value to her?
GROGAN: I don't recall if she said that or not.
GERAGOS: Okay. I'll find a report at the break. I'll show it to you this afternoon. When you were talking to Ann Bird, specifically in that same tape recorded interview, you talked about Amber, correct? Look at 36930.
GROGAN: Yes.
GERAGOS: Okay. And she said that Scott admitted that he had screwed up and that he had made a huge mistake, correct?
GROGAN: Yes.
GERAGOS: And, specifically, you also asked why it was that, you were asking about the fact that he had an attorney; is that correct? Scott had an attorney?
FLADAGER: Do you have the Bates stamp?
GERAGOS: 36932. At the top of the page you are asking, I think Jackie, I'm sorry, Bird, Ann Bird's asking, I think Jackie said that a policeman told her they should get an attorney. She was completely alarmed; is that right?
GROGAN: That's what Ann said.
GERAGOS: You said you didn't know about that. You certainly didn't tell them you needed an attorney. Then she said, yeah, I think Jackie said they were alarmed and so they hired an attorney. Jackie and Lee did, correct?
GROGAN: That's what Ann said, yes.
GERAGOS: And there was talk about who the lawyer was, correct?
GROGAN: Correct.
GERAGOS: Okay. And then you specifically started talking to her about what the media had done; is that correct? Bottom of the page.
GROGAN: Yes.
GERAGOS: Okay. I did find the portion, Bates number 395, about when you phoned Sharon and said that Scott had sold the Land Rover, where it was located. Sharon told you that the vehicle did not have sentimental value to her, correct?
GROGAN: Yes. That particular item did not.
GERAGOS: The car did not have sentimental value?
GROGAN: Correct.
GERAGOS: That was, if I understand correctly, when Miss Fladager had asked you about you brokering some of the belongings back and forth. That was that same conversation, correct?
GROGAN: I think so, yes.
GERAGOS: Okay. And she said that there was, Sharon said the vehicle didn't have any sentimental value, but she wanted the baby's belongings, the crib, Laci's photographs, two Tiffany lamps, correct?
GROGAN: Yes.
GERAGOS: And that was on, some time on January 31st?
GROGAN: I believe that's accurate.
GERAGOS: And so that's when you called up, I believe Miss Fladager asked you. You called up Scott; is that correct? And I'm looking at what's got 334. You received an e-mail which had been forwarded to you from Sharon, correct?
GROGAN: Yes.
GERAGOS: Okay. And Sharon had asked that she wanted the photographs of Laci as well as some Tiffany lamps and some items from the nursery, correct?
GROGAN: Yes.
GERAGOS: And in that e-mail, Scott, it was apparently an e-mail between Sharon and Scott, right, that had been forwarded to you?
GROGAN: I don't know. Is it attached there?
GERAGOS: I don't think that it was. But maybe it is. Let's see if it's the next page. Is that it?
GROGAN: Yes.
GERAGOS: Okay. And specifically on this e-mail that was forwarded to you, Scott apologizes. Says, I have never taken the opportunity to apologize, addressed to mom, correct?
GROGAN: Correct.
GERAGOS: "I have never taken the opportunity to apologize to Ron or yourself for lying to you about my infidelity to Laci," correct?
GROGAN: Yes.
GERAGOS: "I'm truly sorry I was not forthcoming with you immediately. I know both of our goals is to find Laci and Conner. I'm hoping together we can do that more than separate." Correct?
GROGAN: Yes.
GERAGOS: And then the last paragraph, "I receive
kinda like casey anthony did all the wrong things even searched suffocation but was found not guikty,
He's going to carry on a relationship with Amber, yet he's already told her he lost his wife. So given that, how does Scott eventually explain to Amber
"oh yeah, by the way, the wife I Said I lost, it was just Christmas Eve that she went missing, oh and she was pregnant. You still good to go Amber?"
It was a fling. Why do you think he told Amber he was going to be away for the holidays. Because he knew he would be with his family. That's why!
December 19 Amber runs into the estranged wife of Dave Giardanelli-a woman that, according to Giardanelli, had died of a heart condition.
He didn't turn Conner's room into a storage room. January 13, 2003, Scott gave notice to the landlord for the Tradecorp warehouse. Scott indicated in his Notice to Vacate that he would be out of the warehouse by February 12. Scott made arrangements for the Tradecorp product to be warehoused at a distribution center and he rented a storage unit on January 27 to store all the office equipment, furniture and some personal items from the warehouse.
Three chairs from Scott’s office have been rolled into the nursery, and on top of the rocking chair is the red and blue bedding from the second bedroom. Scott brought the items home from the warehouse that did not fit in the storage unit. just like other items from the warehouse that didn't fit into the storage unit were brought home and store in different areas of the home.
Lacy Peterson's mother Sharon Rocha was the most sympathetic victim I've ever seen. I'll never forget her screaming into the microphone saying "They didn't deserve to be thrown away as if their lives had meant nothing!"- Broke my heart.
Yes, she was so excited to be a grandmother and I was devastated for her that Scott took that away from her. I don't care whether Scott hated Laci or not, he had no right to hurt Sharon Rocha like this.
@@PPLL463 that's because no actual evidence was there. She wants to catch the real murderer. Know your facts. You sound naive.
@@PPLL463 Yes some of them were.
Innocent people get convicted. That is a fact.
A jury of your peers means impartial. Innocent until proven guilty.
RICHELLE NICE
(1) denied ever participating in a lawsuit,
(2) denied ever testifying as a
witness and
3) denied ever being the victim of a crime.
In November of 2000 when she 4 1/2 months pregnant, she swore under oath that "acts of violence" were committed against her to "fear for her unborn child".
In Nov 2001 when she was pregnant with a different child, acts of domestic violence including battery and cruelty to a child were committed against her and her young child by her boyfriend who pled no contest to criminal charges.
Greg Beratlis signed a declaration quoting RN regarding her statements about getting Scott for what he did to Laci and "little man" (Conner)
Steve Cardosi another juror signed a declaration for the habeas stating Richelle spoke to jurors about the woman who had been harassing her.
She wrote Scott over two dozen letters to Scott while he was in prison.
She was willing to forgo months of pay to serve the jury even though her employer could only pay two weeks.
@@sarab6842 she knows the real murderer is right where he belongs.
@@jwait1496 still posting this crap huh?
If Scott didn't kill her, then someone killed her/ abducted Lacy, drove about the same time Scott drove to San Francisco Bay, and dumped her in the water about the same time Scott was on the water. This seems highly unlikely. He did it.
But why would Scott dump the body where he went fishing? If he did it it was very stupid of him.And by the way I saw a picture of the boat: very small
And what about the people there who saw him badly manuvering the boat in the water
It was daylight n there were people there
Who in his right mind would dump a body under those conditions. Think about it. Bodies are dumped at night or when there are no people around
@@luisagallarotti9188 The reason he dumped her there was very simple: he thought the two or three concrete ⚓ he tied to her body would weigh her down and she wouldn't float up and he'd get away with murder. But it did work out that way. They were from Modesto, which is like 90 miles away from San Francisco where Laci and Connor were found. Doesn't it seem coincidental that the last day/time Laci is seen alive and she winds up where he went fishing that day? Well, it was more than a coincidence.
A psychopath like him, who thinks theyre clever. You dont understand it because you arent one@@luisagallarotti9188
@billchessmen
What anchors. The trial revealed he made one anchor. It was found in his boat.
The alleged distinctive circles that Brocchini said were on the trailer resembled rectangular shapes from cement bags from work he did at house in September. The pitcher the prosecution alleged Scott made the anchors in didn't even fit.
Geragos: "I've got a sixth-grader -- that looks like a triangle to me."
Hendee: "If you look carefully ..."
(Prosecutor Harris objects)
Delucchi: "The jury can see it. They can draw their own conclusions."
Geragos: (pointing to various shapes) "Is this a circle? ... Is this?"
(Harris objects repeatedly)
Delucchi: "Sustained, sustained, sustained."
Geragos: "Ever go out into the fields where they have those circular patterns?"
CEMENT DID MATCH THE SAMPLE IN THE DRIVEWAY
GEBLER: Yes. In our sample we found fly ash, cement, pea gravel and sand, similar to what was described by Mr. O'Neill.
GERAGOS: Does that mean that the cement that was used in the anchor and the cement that you've collected here and the cement sample that you also observed, does that mean that they all are one and the same?
GEBLER: They're all consistent. They all have, they all have all, from what I saw, the, the, the anchor and these materials are consistent with each other.
GERAGOS: What does that mean?
GEBLER: With the concrete.
GERAGOS: You say they're consistent. Does that mean they have all the same components?
GEBLER: Yes, sir.
The States expert didnt know the difference between a sub base and the actual concrete. How could he since he didn't even go to the scene, Gebler however did.
@@billchessmen
What anchors? The trial revealed he made one anchor. It was found in his boat. The alleged distinctive circles that Brocchini said were on the trailer resembled rectangular shapes from cement bags from work he did at house in September. The pitcher the prosecution alleged Scott made the anchors in didn't even fit. Steven Gebler, a concrete expert, testified at trial the concrete found in the driveway was a match, just like Scott had said.
He called Amber from Lacey's candlelight vigil. I get that people can behave differently in this situation but... wow. When you add that he told Amber he lost his wife before she went missing it just seems beyond odd.
And telling her that he’s in Paris on New Year’s Eve…🤥
Well, again, the very nature of a cheater is lying. Of course he would lie to his mistress. He had to support the premise that he is available. While certainly it points out lack of credibility, when a man’s life is at question, hard evidence also needs to be present. Personally, I feel that Scott is guilty. But I base that on the evidence I heard without any backstory that may have been omitted. Certainly seems like he is the only suspect possible until you account for the burglars and excluded witness’ to her walking the dog?
Eleven eye witness’ is a number to add in reasonable doubt. In the end, I think there were bad presumptions leading to lack of vigilant investigation.
@@susan7090 Scott Peterson reported his wife missing at 6pm dec 24th and the robbery across the street took place between 4am and 7am dec 26th. Just as they determined many years ago one thing had nothing to do with the other, so you can’t include those robbers kidnapping Laci Peterson as a viable theory or a possible scenario of what may have happened to her and then that leaves just Scott who could’ve done it added with his absolutely insane behaviour afterwards…”if it looks like a duck, swims like a duck and quacks like a duck, then it’s probably a duck”
Yes, this is called 'catfishing ' ppl tend to lie this way, doesn't mean he's a murderer. MTV has a whole show on this shit. Watch the facts.
@@adamsapples777 how did anyone rob the neighbors house when there was so much press camped out at Scott Peterson house though? They proved that the date was wrong
I don’t know: who has a missing wife and trades in her car before knowing if she’s dead or not? Who whistles a “whew” when their mother-in-law says no body was found in the bay search? Who changes their hair color, gathers money, etc and heads to the border? Who has a map to the mistress and a burying kit in the back of the car? Who buys a little boat and keeps it secret? Who makes anchors that go missing? Who tells father in law he went golfing then changes story to fishing. Who has a dead wife and baby pop up exactly where he said he was? What father tells someone he was hoping for infertility. Who talks to his mistress at a gathering for his missing wife. Here’s your real motive: he did not want to be a husband and father. He did this. One of the leading causes of death for pregnant women in America? Murder. This is one of those cases. The fact he hadn’t done violence before is not a good argument. That can be said of many. Chris Watts comes to mind at the moment.
I love what you wrote. I agree with you 100% until you get to motive. I have just started looking into the case and was shocked to see Scott’s salary. I am not trying to be a jerk, but I live in a modest house in Metro Atlanta and don’t have any of the things he had, but my family’s salary is 3X his and Lacie’s. He was also going to get fired. He was not a great sales person. The company was going under and didn’t have the capital to continue. Lacie had financial windfalls that supported the family (one from a beloved grandmother who left Lacie over $100k). I believe that not wanting Lacie and getting control of her money was the motivation. If she had no money he may not have been motivated enough. Regards.
Yea, don't forget testimony that Laci stopped going for walks because she was too pregnant. Scott would rather be on death row than change a diaper, bottom line.
Timothy Bryan What!
Wires all crossed... You obviously don't follow the case.... Your going by what you heard on TMZ....
Joan Marie Never watch TMZ. By the way, it is “you’re” not “your.” I followed the case very closely. I have my information directly from the parents of Lacey and the detectives who worked the case. They are featured on a very reputable documentary. What wires do I have crossed, specifically.
It was a weak case that Scott himself made stronger by his own behavior.
Yeah which makes you think that Innocent people can be convicted of any crime based on how other people thing other people should feel and act when human emotions are on a large spectrum. Amanda Knox’s case is a great example of this.
@@cuscotransport6013 No it's not.
There is absolutely nothing proving he is guilty.
@@aok4418so days before she went missing he tells his side chick he lost his wife and this is going to be his first christmas without her, buys a boat, researches about the water currents in a specific area. After she went missing he said he was golfing. Why did he had to lie about that? If there was nothinh suspicious about going fishing, why did he initially hide that?Doesn't make any sense. Then her body shows up in the area he went "fishing". Like, wow, if he's not guilty, he has to be the unluckiest person ever.
@@aok4418 is it true that there were other pregnant women in lacys neighborhood that were murdered as well? If so, why was that not used in scotts defense? I even heard that they found another pregnant woman dead in the same place lacy was found and with her arms, legs chopped off too. Is this true?
@@analuchesi Wow, you really are misinformed.
Detective Wall testified that Scott used his home computer to search for boating regulations, Department of Fish and Game Rules and Regulations, to search classified ads for boats and for information on fishing. In all Scott’s computer use, there is only about 30 seconds total of material that contained any kind of charts for the San Francisco Bay. The prosecution and many news reports egregiously referred to these 30 seconds as “researching” the currents in the San Francisco Bay.
Prosecution Exhibits 179 a-u and 182 a-ee show all pages of Scott’s internet
The important part too about those burglars claiming they were there on the 26th is that by the 26th there were a number of press outside of the Peterson house. It isn't likely a burglar would see a lot of people around with TV cameras and still break into a house.
Wrong.
GERAGOS: Okay. What was the condition of the street on the 26th when you arrived shortly before 5:00 o'clock?
JUDGE: With regard to traffic or vehicles?
GERAGOS: Traffic, whether there were satellite trucks, whether there were police cars, whether there were people there.
WEND: I don't remember any media being there, specifically. I remember some people walking around, but I was able to just drive up to the front yard of the Medina residence, got out and took the burglary report.
GERAGOS: Were you in a marked patrol car?
WEND: Yes, sir.
Scott called Amber during Laci's candelight vigil, and told her that he was celebrating New Year's Eve in Paris during a business trip. He did this while standing next to Laci's family desperately searching and hoping for Laci and Connor. Amber dodged a bullet. She would have been Scott's next victim in one way or another.
If this is true I can see why some are adamant over his guilt….. but true?
True. She wrote a book about what happened, and that story is in it.
@@joan6984 there is video of him on the phone during the vigil. The calls were recorded bc the cops already had Amber Frey helping them. Amber knows he is in Modesto but he tells her he is at the Eiffel tower and the crowd is huge, everyone is dancing to American pop music, and he is having trouble hearing her so he will have to call her back later on her new year (midnight). He had his head down and moved away from all the people who came out to attend HIS WIFE'S VIGIL. It is v cringeworthy. The call was entered into evidence and the video, transcripts and recordings are easily found online. So sad.
@@miaknig3130 Mia losing. This is totally disgusting that he was ignoring Lacies gathering…..he must have some serious mental problem including his high sex drive. He acts like a guilty guy I realize this but apart from that there is too much evidence convincing me that she was kidnapped well after he left the house. Yes, he acts like a guilty jerk this is an immense problem but there is way too much proof that she was kidnapped after he left. There can be two diffrent situations and I think this is the situation.
@@joan6984 you were not sure if the calls were true, one of the most well known parts of the case. Maybe you don't know about other proven evidence. His own words and actions lauded him where he belongs.
What got me was when Scott called his mistress FROM Lacie's candlelight vigil. Also, a bunch of searchers were putting up missing flyers, but when Scott opened his trunk, with his friend or somebody near him, they noticed the huge pile of missing flyers. Scott had not put any of the flyers up.
You have a source for that?
It's *Laci
@@jwait1496 you're correcting someone else's spelling? Baaaahahahahaha 😂 That's the best one I've seen all day 🤣🤣
@@sophie8394You're usually the person's spelling I'm correcting VideoFanatic02.
Remember when you said this to me lol.
---"For the way I'm using the word, whose or whoes is acceptable. Look it up. You might learn something Lol! Anyone can look it up and see for themselves it is a word. You just keep making yourself look more & more stupid.
Get an education maybe you'll quit embarrassing yourself!"
Did you ever find "whoes" to be correct spelling? How about "Speggeti".
Quit stalking me creep!
See my post.
@@jwait1496 wow 😲!!!lol sounds like y'all got history between you!
if I am ever accused of a crime I did not commit I hope Dr Grande is in the jury.
The same might apply if you are ever accused of a crime you did commit.
He called Amber Fry claiming to be in Paris while at a memorial for his wife.
This was recorded by The FBI and he was never in Paris.
True, Scott Pererson is a frequent liar and scumbag; that much has been established. But I think Dr. Grande (among many others) has pointed out there's definitely A LOT of reasonable doubt in the case.
1. Absolutely no physical evidence linking him.
2. If he did kill her, the most rational time to do it was during the night, so he could dispose of her in the dead of night w/o many witnesses. Instead, he drives her body to his boat that morning, so he can dispose of it in broad daylight? Also, people see him at the marina, but NO ONE sees him with any package large enough to hold an adult body...
3. The 11 people who say the saw Laci after Scott left shouldn't be discounted. How many pregnant women matching her description, with a dog like hers, would happen to be strolling around the same area she lived??
Again, I'm not saying I know whether Scott is guilty or not. I don't--I'm not God. But is there reasonable doubt? If we're genuinely trying to be objective and look at the available evidence, yeah, there is...
@@elliota.1063 He would have left evidence had he killed her.
@Megan Smith That's not evidence of murder, Lacy knew about the boat, she just didn't tell her family, and those tools were stored in a house where she lived. He would have left far more evidence, even pros do.
@@elliota.1063 so what about the anchors? He made four anchors on his boat and not all of them were found?
That makes him an assh*le, not a murderer.
Dr. Grande, I’ve been a subscriber for a year or so, and I see that this video was made 3yrs ago. I’ve agreed with every opinion of yours with the exception of this one. I remember when this tragedy happened. I followed it and researched the case for many months. There was a lot of evidence that you didn’t mention re: Scott P. I don’t believe this case depended on what the police initially thought or felt re: Petersons demeanor. This guy is guilty beyond reasonable doubt. imo.
@@andie9589 that is not evidence. Every time I see one of these comments it just proves the point. If there were real evidence against him, you would have used that for your example but you didn't. You do not put people on death row without a shred of evidence.
@@andie9589 Not true. His friends testified in the penalty phase that they didn't believe he was guilty. They weren't JUST saying the death penalty was wrong in this case. You're making up your own testimony.
He’s not guilty beyond reasonable doubt . The DA withheld important evidence like the concrete that Scot bought was told he used it to make anchors that he drowned her with but Scott told them he used it to fill it a pot hole in his driveway and when they checked it out the quick creat was used in the pot hole. Multiple witnesses said they seen her walking the dog after Scott was fishing so how could he dumped her body. And a PI hired by his family went to the bay in that same kind of boat and used a 150 pound dummy to dump it over that little boat 4 times and every time the boat tipped over . There is not one single physical evidence that links him to the crime so he’s not guilty without reasonable doubt
@@vickmcfadden833 what Peterson said about filling a “pot hole” and what his family’s P.I says doesn’t even begin to out way the facts and evidence in the case. Also, the people who say they saw the pregnant lady walking her dog didn’t know her or speak to her that day. Everyone has an opinion and that’s okay.. at the end of the day, the overwhelming evidence supports the guilty verdict.
@@andie9589 although I do believe that Scott wasn’t a perfect man and did have strange behavior, this is simply not real evidence that would convict a man beyond reasonable doubt. It is merely speculation. In addition to the current news that a jury was biased and lied on her pre-jury application is the reason this trail will have a re hearing later this month
He cleared out the baby's nursery so fast it made my head spin. Cleared it out BEFORE it was known for 100% certain Lacy and the baby were dead. He also said he didn't really need any children because he had his friends to toss a football with. This man did not want to be a father and he did not want to be married.
Janetlwil curious where that info came from. Not doubting...
Yeah, but none of that has to do with the actual evidence in the case, which is what we're SUPPOSED to judge cases on...
No if he cleared ot the nursery before the body was found that is evidence that he knew they weren't coming back. You see this in guilty cases all the time and I've not seen it once in an innocent case.
You obviously haven't listened to a thing in this video.
Damm...but who is going to push you around in your wheelchair in 40 years time?
Dr Grande didn't consider what I think is one of the most important fact: that Laci's body was found right where Scott said he was that day. What are the chances someone else dumped her body right where Scott said he was??
I think they said, something about the investigators told the world, where Scott had went that day> I think the idea was the robbers dump Laci after they heard where he went,,, That sounds flakey! but, personally I think he is innocent,,,
@@jeanniehanford2563 This is something I need to look into. I don't know if the cops immediately disclosed this, or whether it was a couple weeks/months after the fact. It may make a huge difference in whether this is plausible based on the condition of the bodies. What do you think about him having told Amber that his wife was dead and that he cried hysterically about it to her and all the lies he told about where he was on new years?
@@Jay_Birdyessir, they immediately publicized his alibi just days after the 24. Pretty bad move on their part.
When Scott got home from "fishing", he called, Sharon, and said, "Laci is missing", which to me is an odd thing to say. Why didn't Scott say, "Is Laci with you?" or "I can't find Laci"? Also, when Scott went to his neighbor's house to ask about Laci, he told the neighbor he had been golfing. His story definitely changed.
Thats a good point. So many speak past tense or spell too much what they actually know. Commonly people would say have you heard from or seen. Then go through the list. Sure car was there but she does walk a dog. Its precisely what is said more then any emotion showed. All people react differently in front of others. Some are absolutely so shy a stranger (police) tell them something horrific and absolutely won't get anything from them until they are around someone they know or trust.
@@Lindseyisloony I agree!
That is exactly what I said....I feel Scott is as guilty as hell.
@@geofff6671 My first reaction would be to ask hey is Laci with you? Thinking maybe her mom came and got her. Not to automatically think something was amiss.
@@geofff6671 no. you'd ask "where is she? is she with you?" you don't automatically assume someone is missing
If you are cheating on your wife, you better hope to God she doesn't die.
Ya, either he is guilty or he’s very unlucky. Being a liar and a cheater destroys your credibility. And being emotionless and smug biases people against interpreting your actions generously.
I wish the investigation had followed up on exculpatory evidence. And had obtained physical evidence. Their circumstantial theories were easily challenged but repeated enough in the media people took them as solid.
There are too many things pointing to Scott being guilty, guilty in my book
No there wasn’t.
Totally guilty
@@Lily-flying Go watch Stephanie Harlowe's breakdown of the case. I felt exactly the same way until I listened to her 2-hour break down.
Norman J why do you feel the need to belittle women by calling them “little angry ladies”... you could state your opinion without being demeaning.
@@kkheflin3 Stephanie Harlow based her video off an American Justice episode. And not all factual.
I love your videos, and in this one you bring up some good points. But I disagree with you on your conclusions for this one.
Scott Peterson told Amber Frey he had "lost his wife", before the murder. That indicates to me that he most probably did do it and it was premeditated. He had MOTIVE to kill her: he wasn't thrilled about becoming a father, he was having an affair (s), they were having financial problems, and there was life insurance. I just don't see two house burglars having enough motive to kill her and her unborn child and disposing of her body out in the bay. Did either of them have access to a boat?
I don't see someone like Lacy, who grew up in California, going up to a house being broken into alone, without first calling the police.
If you look at his affair with Amber, you see he was very manipulative and not really concerned with the consequences of his behavior.
It doesn't seem in the range of normal to me that he showed no concern for his nearly full-term son. Even if he wanted a divorce and was not in love with Laci anymore, it still does not seem normal that he showed no concern for her whereabouts or that of their son. He was texting and lying to his lover while family is holding a candlelight vigil, for Pete's sake.
I think there may be room for some reasonable doubt, but his behavior and motives put him in the 51% or more catagory. There's lots more, but other people are commenting on those things.
I too agree with some of the points made in the video. It could be argued there may be reasonable doubt just because of the way the case was eventually handled. However what tips it into the 51% is the inconsistencies in Scott Peterson's truths. On the day he wasn't sure of if he was fishing or golfing to certain people. He recently purchased a new boat (careless who knew about it). He planned this event or just spur of the moment to go to the bay on the one day of the year that was chaotic, leaving his 8 month pregnant wife. (He wasn't working)
He didn't really have anything of note to say about that day he took the time to travel 90miles? He didn't even have the correct equipment in some aspects. You could say he didn't really care if he had caught nothing or did nothing up there. He picked the one day out of the year where it would be not as busy in the marina bay.
The comments to Amber Frey are also concerning. Prior to Laci's disappearance, Scott predicted the death or disappearance of his wife to Amber (obviously this was his cover about him being married to gain sympathy and to keep his married life a secret.)
Witnesses are the lowest form of evidence that the courts can produce because their testimonies can be scrutinized. So, this argument about seeing Laci Peterson walking her dog doesn't ring true when other reports say that, the dog was a different breed or the woman in question was pregnant but no dog and all those other sort of problematic differences in obtaining accurate accounts of that day.
He had the truck, boat and storage facility. He had the means to make his own anchors and again he also had another "truth" to explain what he used all the cement for. Infact he had a lot of the answers to whatever questions were raised. Didn't much matter how trivial those questions were, he had them.
The one thing that really nailed it, is that the bodies did wash up where he had been fishing that day. 3miles from his location. Science doesn't always reveal the truth, whatever that truth may be. Commonsense has to be applied in almost all aspects of criminal cases.
This is just an example piece.
Two people locked in a small confined room, one is dead. There's a gun in the room. This person was shot. However, science says there is no evidence that the other person did this. The door is locked from the inside and they were talking just moments ago. The science also says the other person didn't commit suicide either.
The one person alive will tell the truth and by his own actions, deny accountability but if he can't explain the occurrences that lead to this then the truth lies there.
Pace Yrself didn’t they also find the molds he used to make the weights to hold the body under water? Or an anchor was found- I remember the concrete was a match to the type Peterson had
I have just recently started watching this man speak. I enjoy his videos but he's got it so wrong about Scott peterson. Remember scott phoned Amber from the vigil but he said he was in Paris at the eifel tower, also he said my wife is lost to amber before lacy went missing, pre meditated as he knew what was go happen to lacy and there unborn child.
Pace Yrself I agree, I understand where Dr. Grande is going with this. You cannot know how an individual will deal with his grief. Yes, there were holes in the investigation. But if you follow Scott Peterson cold hearted behavior, in general... and his whole affair. You can bet he was a Narcissist, and a psychopath. Never mind, his upbringing was the classic case of how to raise a psychopath, with the propensity to kill.
Exactly.
We don't need all the puzzle pieces to be in place before we can see the big picture. Lack of scientific evidence or not, Scott consistently told on himself. Science can only explain so much in this world...the rest of it we have to piece together using intuition, judgment and critical thinking.
Did this guy mention that he had made cement weights just prior to Lacy's disappearance. The burglary across the street is a far cry from a pregnant woman being bound and thrown into the bay! WHY??? What motive did any random stranger have to kill Lacy and Connor? They didnt steal anything. It doesnt add up that anyone other than Scott did it. "I'm at the Eiffel Tower, its amazing". As he was on his cell phone talking to Amber at Lacys vigil.
you are correct
This is (so far) the only analysis of a case you’ve done where I wholeheartedly disagree with you. But I still love you 😊
@Teresa S. I agree. I often agree with Dr Grande but not on this case. Go to Stephanie Harlowe's true crime channel. She does an excellent job of breaking this case down bit by bit and if I had any doubt before that Scott was innocent that was erased after I saw all the facts that were presented.
Dr Grande, I just started watching you and was so impressed. But u have this case totally wrong! He is so guilty! I followed the whole trial and read Ambers book. Please look at all the facts!
There's much he left out especially about him lying to Amber and him getting rid of Lacey's stuff soon after
Scott Peterson was a fertilizer salesman. Actually he was chemical salesman, fertilizer is chemicals and those chemicals are used in the production of meth, who was probably involved with chemical sales to illicit drug producers. The manner of the investigation has appearances of a set up. Throw in the problems with selecting a jury that was ready kill him, he had no chance of a fair trial. How can you convict with circumstantial evidence that has no basis in science or logic.
He needs a new trial without inclusion of the death penalty. We all know the threat of death does not deter a murderer who is confidant he will never be convicted in addition to the obvious fact that CA will never execute another inmate at San Quentin.
@@norman1741 Who is angry? The above ladies have been very polite and respectful actually, while voicing their disagreement, in this one case?
Doc, you've left out a great deal of evidence to support his guilt.
He also puts too much weight on evidence that is notoriously unreliable (eyewitness testimony). He knows it's unreliable and yet he asks, "Could they all be wrong?" - The answer is yes, they can all be wrong, and it wouldn't even be unusual for them all to be wrong.
Dis-information video
or
Just another UA-camr
The JOKE IS ON US!
THIS GUY IS HAVING TROUBLE MAINTAINING
HIS AMERICAN ACCENT.
And/Or foreign disinformation....yup.
@@nagmastergeneral948 that’s a huge leap bud
@M Bird EVERYTHING the prosecution presented fell apart! That's fact.
@M Bird That verdict was purely based on emotion. They won their case only when Amber Fry hit the stand. Yes, Scott Peterson is a cheating pile of shit but that doesn't make him a murderer. I 100% agree with Dr. Grande, I don't know if Scott killed his wife but I doubt it happened the way the prosecution said it did. I'm glad Scott is on the road for a new trial, I want to hear the real evidence. BTW I was in junior high when this unfolded, I remember it very clearly.
Amber was very lucky she didn’t get further along with this guy. Pure evil.
When she realized who he was she went to the police
did u not watch the video?
Oh she was a class act. She went to the police and then posed nude in a magazine.
Maybe if Amber would wait to sleep with a man until after she is married or at least has met his family, none of this would have happened either.
@@cherp7522 get real lol do you wait to sleep with a man? I doubt it lol
Just as an aside on "eye witnesses" who saw Laci walking her dog. I recall years ago, in a psych class (it might have actually been a psych and the law class) the professor arranged for an individual to knock on the door, walk in, hand the professor a message with words, and then leave. This was a Monday, Wed, Friday class. On the following Friday, the professor asked the class to write a description of the individual who interrupted the class the previous Monday. 30-35 students in that class, and about as many different descriptions of the individual and the event. Some said it was a female, some said it was male, different color hair, eyes, etc. The point is, that when we are going about our daily lives, we don't pay attention to things. And when asked to recall, we "reconstruct" events, often times filling in the blanks with past experiences. Just like all the people who were positive they saw Brian Laundrie (despite the fact that he was already likely dead), and saw him all over the country.
Interesting. Thanks!
True, although 8 mnd pregnant is a major eye catcher.
You're suggesting OVER a dozen witnesses who independently seen Laci walking and described her down to to even the breed of her dog, is no more credible than a single witness. 🤦♂️
Let's talk about the clothes Laci was wearing.
Margarita Nava, Laci’s housekeeper, told Detective Brocchini that when she arrived at 8:30 a.m. Laci was wearing a white long-sleeved shirt and (probably) black stretch-type maternity pants, as that was her usual outfit.
This was a typical outfit for her according to Debra Wolski, Laci’s instructor at the Village Yoga Center.
Mark Geragos: Okay. Now, you also described the clothing that she wore as black stretch pants, white shirt, long sleeves, white tennis shoes and a red fleece vest, correct?
Debra Wolski: In the winter, yes. In the cold months.
Mark Geragos: Okay. And you described what she was wearing on December 4th, do you remember that?
Debra Wolski: It would have been the same. The white shirt, the black stretch pants, the red fleece vest.
And this is what Scott told Sharon Rocha on February 13, 2003 in a phone conversation:
SHARON ROCHA: And what was she wearing when you left?
PETERSON: Ah she had on her black pants - and like a white top with long sleeves.
SHARON ROCHA: A pullover or button or what?
PETERSON: Yeah. Pullover like ah-you know tee shirt kinda sweater kinda thing.
None of the clothing items which Laci was described as wearing on the morning she disappeared were found in the house during the first search.
Craig Grogan: We were looking for a white shirt, but we didn't find one in the first search warrant, which would have matched her description on December 24th. We were also looking for white tennis shoes. We did find some white shoes, but they were slip on. They looked like tennis shoes from the front, but they slip on from the back. They don't have a standard back that a tennis shoe would have on them. As far as clothing, that's what I recall we recovered there.
Grogan testified: “I would say the majority match with black pants or white shirts, with the description that was released to the media.”
The MPD hid information from the public and the defense. Remember, a treasure trove of incriminating evidence against S Todd and G Pearce existed. information about any investigation of this tip. Lt. Aponte gave a signed statement to defense investigators which said the prisoner had been interviewed by MPD, and that MPD had received a copy of the taped phone conversation. Instead of this information being disclosed during discovery. The only information provided to the defense about his tip was a simple notation on a CD which included 10,000 other tips about the case.
-Merlin, the trailing dog owned by Cindee Valentin, trailed Laci's scent to the Gallo Winery in the airport district, on the night of December 26.
-December 31, a gold Croton watch, identical to Laci’s watch which disappeared the same day she did, was pawned by Deanna Renfro. Highly unlikely this is just a coincidence.
It gets better. The families of Deanna Renfro, Steven Todd and the Tenbrinks know one another.
-Diane Jackson reported seeing 3 men with a VAN and a SAFE in front of the Medina’s house at 11:40 a.m. on December 24. There is no debating this. The burglary happened the same day Laci disappeared. Both Todd and Pearce pled guilty to burglary charges 12-24-02. They both received reduced sentences.
- S Todd would have received 25 years for his third offense. So why did he get 8 years and 8 months, far less than 25 years. Pearce received only 180 days, yet he was another career criminal.
-Tom Harshman, who lived in Modesto, 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 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. But they were gone.
1. He called police (911 MPD) that same day.
2. Tried again December 28.
3. December 28, he also called the Laci tip line twice. His first call on this date was listed incorrectly under the name Harsh and was given Bates Stamp number 14789. The call was given to Detective Holmes. Harsh(man) said that he had called 3 or 4 days earlier on the day that he had seen a pregnant young woman being pushed into a van. There had been a man standing over her as she squatted to urinate with her back up against a chain-link fence. The man was described as 30’s, tall, thin, with ponytail, dirty blonde to gray hair, scrubby looking. When she finished, the woman was shepherded back to the driver’s door of the car, where another man’s arm was seen pulling her into the car. He said the young woman was wearing black pants and a red shirt. He said she had a scared look on her face."
4. Jan 3rd, he went to the Command Post in the park and relayed this to the officer on duty. Over
40,000 pages in the discovery and nothing about this report was in it.
5. February 2003, Harshman’s wife spoke to a relative of hers who lived in New York about the sighting of Laci Peterson near the corner of Scenic and Claus. Mrs. Harshman’s relative shared this story with an NYPD detective. This NYPD detective was so concerned that he contacted the MPD and spoke personally to Detective Grogan on February 14, 2003. What did Grogan do with the information? Nothing at all.
6. pre-trial hearings in May of 2004, DA Investigator Kevin Bertalotto noticed the Harshman tip and insisted that Grogan call Tom Harshman and speak to him personally. Grogan did this on May 18, 2004.
An audiotape and a transcription of his conversation with Harshman to the defense on May 20, 11 days before the beginning of the trial.
Over a dozen witnesses had described Laci even down to the breed of her dog on the 24th.
Yet not a single person ever came forward or was found that could have been Laci, and the her disappearance was highly publicized. So who did they see?
Here are the people interviewed.
Elizabeth Guptill, pregnant walker with son in jogging stroller, no dog, didn’t walk in December
Janet Kenworthy, Park walker with white Huskie mix (she didn’t testify), worked on 24th, thinks husband walked the dog that day
Jill Lear, pregnant walker with Australian Shepherd, didn’t walk 24th
Joan Lee, pregnant walker with chocolate Lab and Husband, didn’t walk 24th
Melba Martinez, La Loma walker with 2 Golden Retrievers, didn’t remember if she walked 24th
Dianne Merenda, blond, not pregnant, Park walker with Golden Retriever, didn’t walk 24th
Patricia Mewhinney, long blonde hair, Park walker w/German Shepherd/Black Lab mix, drove and then walked on 24th east from Phoenix
Amy Neumann, pregnant walker with apricot standard Poodle, not walking in December
Jordan Visola-Prescott, pregnant neighborhood walker with black/white Border Collie/Lab mix and Red Flyer red wagon with daughter in it, 99% sure she didn’t walk on the 24th
Kim Westphal, not pregnant, long brown hair, neighborhood walker with Golden Retriever and a friend, 14766 : Kim Westfall (Westphal); she was walking with a friend on 12-24 at 11:30
Michelle Dean (Merced Co. DA, Laci look-alike with Golden Retriever named McKenzie), did not walk on December 24
This is a great point I think this should be a required lesson in any education. I was in middle school in the 1970s and they did this exact thing. Except they had somebody running with a mask and a fake gun and pretend to be a terrorist. Lol. Things were a little bit different back then When we had something called a liberal education. I have never forgotten that lesson from age 12 to now.
If you *actually* watched the trial and listened to the evidence in this case, there is no way to explain it ALL away. Scott killed Laci, above and beyond a reasonable doubt, he killed her.
I’m hoping you don’t know all the evidence. Because if you do, I’m afraid you have no common sense.
In fact he did mention to a neighbor that he went golfing that morning, then changed his story to fishing.
Honestly, one could remove half of the evidence and accurately conclude he did it.
Only because all of the evidence proves him innocent. Despite $millions, the prosecution could find no evidence of guilt. All they did was say that if you assumed he WAS guilty, and looked at the evidence in the worst light for him (which is the reverse of how a jury should work), then it hinted at guilt, sort of, maybe. That's called a lynching, not a trial.
Unfair trial. 1, 11 of the jurors badgered the 12th juror so badly he feared for his life and resigned his duties. 2 the woman that replaced him had her mind made up and committed perjury on the juror questionaire. 3, The house across the street was being burglarized, Lacy confronted them , I believe they kidnapped her. 4,The police released the evidence of where he said he went fishing long before the bodies were discovered so those thugs that had her were watching tv, saw this and poof took her there and dumped in the water.
@@edwarcandy4648 Very likely similar. BTW, many think the woman who was removed did 'research' and was removed. IMO, she felt bullied by another juror and wanted off. Her research meant nothing if she even did it and was far more innocuous than what the juror who talked to the bar man did. There was no reason to remove her. He should have been removed.
@@NoSpam1891 Look at the newest Exculpatory evidence videos with Scotts Sister or Sister in law, Dad and a few others bringing new ( old unseen by the jury) evidence to light. It is really good for Scott
@@edwarcandy4648 Yes. It's hard not to say that Geragos failed him. There was so much crap the prosecution got away with and so much that should have been explored properly. This was Geragos' first murder case and it didn't go well.
The Family annihilator is a repeated story. I can see Scott clearly as an Annihilator. There's the typical narcissistic motive at play. The lies. He is soooo guilty. You should look into family annihilators and give us your take on it.
Dr. Grande thought this about Chris Watts , but not Peterson???
You are wrong this time. I watched this investigation and trial closely at the time. Maybe you have a couple of points, but if we heard the rebuttal there would be answers. No way.
I remember following this case on the news as it unfolded. What convinced me of his guilt was the finding of Conner and Laci's bodies only a couple of miles from where Scott was fishing that day. I find it unlikely that burglars or intruders would travel so far with Laci's body and dump it in the same waters where Scott was fishing.
My issue with THAT is police, within 2 days, had a press conference telling the world where Scott was fishing. They allowed for the opportunity of a perfect framing. New evidence has come out and also evidence not allowed in the trial. There's too much reasonable doubt, and a real possibility the burglars did it. 11 witnesses who knew her saw her that morning. A neighbor did see her confront suspicious people. He needs a new trial. If he's guilty then they prove it with all the evidence this time.
@@cb3514 sure they were just carrying the bodies around for days waiting to figure out where to dump them! lmfao seriously?!
@@catnapper7509 no. That's not what the evidence says. They wouldn't have been dead...and Connor's growth indicates that. You obviously are missing a lot of actual evidence.
@@catnapper7509 Conner was alive no less than 6 days after the 24th. That comes from a forensic pathologist (medical examiner) and a forensic anthropologist.(States expert) and an OBGYN with over 30 years experience.
They concluded Conner could have been alive even as far along as Jan 14th.
@@jwait1496 OK I agree it's not been proven beyond a reasonable doubt. I don't like it either. But my suspicion is he did it. Not enough to convict, just my opinion. Cheers y'all.
You failed to mention Amber Frye's testimony theft Scott told her his wife had died at the time she went missing. Also, he brought cinder blocks on board when he went fishing. You didn't discuss Scott's narcissism or psychopathy.
Yes, he shows no remorse for his dead wife and child. Cold and cunning.
He didn't buy cinder blocks.
And stop pretending go diagnose someone when you know very little.
Am sure mr grande in the case of Christ watts u will say he is innocent too
CCMA bob he didn’t buy cinder blocks because he made his own in his garage. It was in the trial.
@@mipspc No he didn't.
Research the case.
It was debunked at trial.
How about this: He told his mistress, Amber Frey, that he was a widower two weeks before Lacy disappeared. I don't think you mentioned that. He was foreshadowing the future.
true
It could have been a lie too, someone saying he was a widower has no bearing on a future killing.
He had not desire of been a father and on Holiday coming He was planning to expended with the girl his having a affairs and told her he had lost his wife ,how was he going to justify not expende thank Given with his wife and family ?
@@johndoeisme Correct!
How about this :
He told her that to reinforce his statement that he was looking for a legitimate long term relationship with Frey.
Divorce/polygamy or abandonment would lead her to believe that he's lying and that in reality he's a "player."
Guys do that all the time without "foreshadowing" the "pending" murder of their "ex" wives while they're still very much alive and live to a ripe old age ending by natural causes.
Which only serves to prove him a womanizing liar and not a murderer.
Which subsequently, is not illegal.
But consequently leads people to draw erroneous conclusions of guilt.
Why would a guilty man that's planning but not yet executed the murder of his wife tell his girlfriend she's already dead?
Lol!
Only makes sense to those that succumb to feelings due to lack of or more probably in spite of facts, reason and logic.
😀
Did anyone consider that maybe Scott had someone kill her? I’ve always wondered this.
"Im sure they were nice dogs, I dont have anything against the dogs..." XD Love it
😂 I'm dying! They were also unqualified! 😂 They need to hire better qualified dogs! They need better resume writers!
He is the best🥰🥰🥰🥰🥰
His suspicious behavior doesn't mean anything? Really?!
Right! Nice dogs. Lol
@@cynthiastenstrom5361 dogs hilarious great channel
I thought it was weird that he went fishing alone on Christmas Eve.
san francisco bay can be very dangerous for someone with a small boat, when i was in high school i remember a girl lost her father and brother when they went fishing on the bay in a small boat, and it became windy and their bodies were never found. The police searched for 2 weeks, then gave up, the sharks probably ate then
@@susansparanormalpennsylvan81 But those magical sharks didn't eat Laci or the child....hmmmmm
@@HagakureJunkie
Lol Good point.
The whole family went fishing with him...he came back home...alone
@@c2itccase9 What???
absolutely 100% guilty and I'm from Modesto, CA and I knew her (Laci) when she worked for Gallo
Randy P :YOU BEING FROM MODESTO MUST ALSO KNOW THE OTHER PREGNANT WOMEN THAT WERE ABDUCTED & DISSAPEARED & ON HULU TV, " THE MURDER OF LACI PETERSON " THE TOWN IS DANGEROUS! READ MATT DALTON BOOK PRESUMED GUILTY
You knew laci? Well shit.....he must be guilty then
Sales. Cartel. Fertilizer. Customers. Methodists. Framed. Extorted. Striper.. Viagra. Mexico.
@@georgie6902 If you're not from here I'm not sure how you can make that statement. I lived in Modesto my entire life, and not in the best neighborhood. I wouldn't even say it's dangerous. So unless you're a gang member or committing crimes, it's very uncommon for something bad to happen to you. My AMR explorer group helped in the search efforts for Laci from day 1 and Scott was not involved at all, it was only Laci's friends and family. I also worked where she took pre natal yoga and my mentor was very close to her and tere is no doubt in any of our minds that Scott did this.
@@daughterofthemosthigh8780 I’m from Modesto, it’s a big piece of shit town. I moved to Palo Alto about 15 years ago and never looked back at that glorified meth den of city💯
14 witnesses and the defense called none of them
I don't know much about the case, but I thought the "witnesses" claimed to have seen a pregnant lady walking a dog; not that they knew Laci & positively identified her.
Thinking about it, I vaguely remember @ least 1 possible witness saying the police never got back to her.
I wonder why the defence didn't call any of them, to show reasonable doubt.
@Kasia they said pregnant woman, not 8th month pregnant...big difference. So...alot actually on that street.
@@ShipsKat They were not allowed to, which really raises flags.
@Kasia there are pregnant women and golden retrievers all over the place. And considering that is a breed most highly recommended for families with small children, the occurence of pregnant women with golden retrievers is probably lot more common than you would think. That would be easy enough to chase down if you were detectives of the time.
The prosecution stated he killed laci on December 23, the defense showed laci was on her computer looking at umbrellas with sunflowers on them at 8:40 am on December 24. Scott’s Lawler believed this proved the prosecution’s theory was wrong and there is now reasonable doubt. The fear was if some of the witnesses could be shown incorrect or confused the jury would be also or hold it against the defense, looking back it would not have mattered, that jury was finding Scott guilty, even if laci and Connor showed up alive
I think he and Chris Watts were cut from the same cloth - covert narcissist + antisocial.
Great, what are your qualifications again LOL
@@Hshjshshjsj72727 What an ignorant, immature question.
@@gabe-po9yi Wow, you really came back to change what you wrote ? What a loser 😂😂😂
@@Hshjshshjsj72727 you write like a child
@@claudioortiz5830 thanks I value your opinion lol
I love the direction you're going with discussing some of these high profile cases!
Thank you so much :)
Same here!!!
Scott Peterson told Amber Frey that he had "lost his wife" before while she was very much alive. At a candlelight vigil for Laci, Scott called Amber Frey and told her he was ringing in the new year in Paris. He truly was a fertilizer salesman.
I'm not saying that, just because he had an affair or seemed calm and collected with a missing wife, that automatically means he committed murder. But it's the preponderance of so many other things on top of that. The police certainly made their share of errors, but they didn't make him act so guilty. He incriminated himself. And then there was the escape attempt. He disguised himself, took his brother's ID, and made a run for the border in a vehicle full of survival and camping gear. He was trying to disappear because he knew he was guilty.
The theory about the burglars makes zero sense. Two burglars murder a woman in Modesto, haul her all the way out to San Francisco Bay, and drop her in there? Scott Peterson said he went fishing in the bay on the 24th. Your fastidious and festive wife is 7.5 months pregnant, you have a mistress, and you go out fishing the day before Christmas? My goodness, he told the police where he was that day, and sure enough, that's where the bodies were found. If someone else did it, did he happen to encounter them at the bay with his wife's body in their boat?
The likelihood of anyone else being responsible in this case is infinitesimal.
I love your braingrapes.
Couldn't have said it better myself!!
I've heard it said that narcissistic people are actually really bad at crime because they can't see how something might look from other people's perspectives. They overestimate their skills and tend to think they have committed the perfect crime when they obviously haven't.
There are obviously so many parallels here with the Chris Watts case. You would have thought Chris would have studied this case to see where Scott screwed up. Neither one could resist the urge to try and dupe law enforcement or the media, but they didn't fool anyone.
Laci was 8 1/2 months pregnant.
"It's very clear in our system that we would rather let ten people who are guilty not be punished than punish one person who is not guilty." I'm a Dr. Grande fan and always appreciate the insight as well as the frequent humor. This statement at the very end demonstrates a naivete about the theory versus the reality of the American justice system. While I wish it was true, my experience tells me many in cases, and especially ones which are in the public eye, the prosecution frequently abandons the guilt/innocence aspect of a case for a "Can I get a conviction?" approach.
Most important statement in the vid, and the comments. So. True. Caught my attention too. What?!!
Very few people see somebody accused of a crime and ask: 'So, dear prosecutor, which crime are they not guilty of?'
Think of every case where the person is found to be not guilty, ask if the defence team had to say anything at all. Logically if the prosecutor did not prove the case, there is no need for any defence at all. But most people expect to see all the explanations of minor facts (why did you not cry? why did the body end up in a body of water connected to where you have fished?) and if no explanations are given... then GUILTY!
I was stunned at the good doctors naïveté as well, mostly because I thought he stayed objective in his analysis only to end with that ridiculous statement. Anyone that has had to deal with a public defender knows the reality of our justice system. If you cannot afford to hire a decent defence attorney guilt or innocence no longer matters. Also it was obvious that the prosecution was very calculated and tried this case in the media to create a storm of public hatred for Scott Peterson to aid in getting the conviction. Bottom line, there was ZERO physical evidence to be used against Scott yet he was convicted. And those eleven witnesses to seeing Lacy cannot be ignored simply because they don’t fit the prosecutions timeline. Anyone of us can be imprisoned regardless of guilt or innocence in our current justice system
The entire theory of the prosecution was that Scott didn’t want to be a family man and wanted to be with Amber Frey, a woman with a child. What guy would slaughter his entire family to be with a slut with a bastard child. Makes absolutely no sense to me.
Yeah, that's not only wildly inaccurate it's enraging. I've noticed he tends to lean a little right politically sometimes. Only someone with that kind of thought process as a smart person would minimize the eagerness to lock people up for trivial things and that it's a real money making business. I mean why tf is he thinking saying that?! Does he not know we have more incarcerations by really f'ng far than any country in the world?! lol doesn't give much weight to his sentiment. I think it's also why he was generous to Jordan Peterson who's an obvious right wing grifting hack. Evan Rachel Wood whom he sided with in the Manson case is not lookin great right now. There's so much evidence that literally suggests a hoax. Hopefully he'll look into it and make another video to correct what I believe to be an incorrect opinion that made him come across naive for an objective, intellectual and mental health professional. When I first heard Manson was a pos I thought, probably. But it didn't take long to actually look into it before I formed a strong opinion, let alone made a video taking her side simply because she made claims. I'm glad he has a good take on this case and many others. I just sometimes disagree with him strongly enough to no longer binge like I initially did lol.
'James Bond had good social skills… though that is debatable' :D Sure is! Love your videos, Dr. Grande, can't get enough.
Well, he definitely had commitment issues.
Amber Frye did not *know* she was a "mistress," therefore I am reticent in calling her one.
it's an archaic term anyways, made me wince too.
@@jonnylumberjack6223 Yep, for sure.
Fair enough. She didn't have the intention to be such. Maybe "lover"?
If you are dating someone and all you have is a cell phone number wouldn't you think there was someone else? Also, she had dated a married man in the past and would have had experience with men keeping relationships quiet.
@@kimlee1968 Hmmm, good point... I guess.
First time I’ve ever disagreed with you Doc. How about the fact he said he was going to go golfing that day but changed his mind because it was too cold and rainy so instead he decided to drive 3 hours round trip and 180 miles to fish for less than an hour? How about the timing of the purchase of the fishing license? What about his lies about the concrete? His explanation for the pool umbrellas in the back of his pick up? Laci’s hair strands in boat? The circumstantial evidence is endless and overwhelming. If he gets a new trial, I’m confident a second jury will come to the same conclusion, first degree premeditated murder.
Turns out that Scott never said he was going golfing. Not to anyone. Lacy's stepfather assumed that's where he had been. Lacy knew he was going fishing because was going to warehouse first and she asked him to drop of the large umbrellas for storage. She knew about the boat she was seen there with him a week before by witnesses who knew her. The detectives did so much lying in this case that he will likely get a new trial. But yeah the golf thing has been debunked in interviews and transcripts
What about the concrete.
-DID NOT MAKE FIVE ANCHORS.
They did not find cement anchors in the bay even though the State alleged he made 5 anchors. These distinctive circles that Brocchini said were on the trailer resembled rectangular shapes from cement bags from work he did at house in September. The pitcher the prosecution alleged Scott made the anchors in didn't even fit.
-CEMENT DID MATCH THE SAMPLE IN THE DRIVEWAY
CONCRETE EXPERT
GEBLER: Yes. In our sample we found fly ash, cement, pea gravel and sand, similar to what was described by Mr. O'Neill.
GERAGOS: Does that mean that the cement that was used in the anchor and the cement that you've collected here and the cement sample that you also observed, does that mean that they all are one and the same?
GEBLER: They're all consistent. They all have, they all have all, from what I saw, the, the, the anchor and these materials are consistent with each other.
GERAGOS: What does that mean?
GEBLER: With the concrete.
GERAGOS: You say they're consistent. Does that mean they have all the same components?
GEBLER: Yes, sir.
He forgot to take the umbrellas out. Where's the evidence these umbrellas were used for anything?
People often fish when it's cold. How often do you see people swinging golf clubs when it's cold and "raining".
I've always thought he was not guilty of murder, only adultery.
@@jwait1496 it really bothers me how much misinformation people have regarding this case, but that is 100% due to the media who promoted false statements by the detectives from the very beginning. Those false details get spread over the years, and people become convinced they know everything. Just like the jury, with 2 brand new replaced members during verdict did. Most people also don't realize that, for some reason, this jury was never sequestered. That means a lot of them went home each night researching and soaking in everything the media shared. Many of them were interviewed much later, and outright admitted they did this. I never understood how the judge could legally demand no sequester...especially for this infamous case. Is there a chance he's guilty of it? Absolutely! Was he given a legal trial, and is he guilty beyond a reasonable doubt? Absolutely not. I think he will get a new trial, and this time all the evidence will be presented...I hope. If he's guilty then the prosecution can prove it without all the lies, omission, and mishandling.
The only actual evidence is a piece of hair found in his boat? What about any other evidence found in the house, pickup, or anything else that shows evidence of a murder? What about all the witnesses that saw laci that day and no witnesses seeing Scott commiting a murder or transporting a body at the dock? Seems like a coincidence
"I'm sure the dogs were nice dogs." Oh Dr Grande. You can tell how kind hearted you are in taking such care in making sure you don't disparage the possibly unqualified search dogs. That little detail made me smile inspire of the tragic case you're discussing.
He’s such a decent person. 😊
You can tell how genuine Dr. Grade is, huh? It is a rare trait, especially through social media and a person with a big following. I respect Dr. Grande!
I'm not overly concerned about him saying he was a widower....maybe for some reason that was a better option than saying he was divorced?
Someone who could cheat, lie to mistress, went on boat in same area where bodies were found. I do find his demeanor suspicious. He lost a wife and son. I believe he has severe personality disorder. He had motive and opportunity. If you add everything up together he's guilty.
Are you kidding me people should be careful not to offend a dog really it's crazy
Since he was having an affair, he clearly did not love his wife, hence the lack of emotion on her disappearance.
That's not necessarily true. And they made his affair WAY more torrid and intense than it actually was. I watched a documentary on the case that blew mind as I always thought he was beyond guilty. I don't think so anymore. He only saw Amber in person a couple of times. His boat couldn't have carried all that weight. People saw her arguing with potential robbers of her next door neighbor. I'd continue to look into it.
@@cassondralynch6342 sorry to hear you fell for the Peterson family documentary.
He saw Amber several times, for days at a time, overnight, going on hikes with her and her daughter and picking out and decorating a Christmas tree.
His boat was more than capable of carrying the weight.
No one saw her arguing with *burglars*. No one. The burglary ACROSS THE STREET happened on the 26th. Already proven. But the documentary didn't tell you that did they?
Yes. YOU should definitely continue to look into it.
@@sophie8394 It was an A&E doc.. there were many people saying his boat would've tipped from the weight. The thing is experts often have agendas and are paid opposition. I wouldn't be shocked if he was guilty, but was shocked that there was as much reasonable doubt for me as there was after watching the series. The objectivity that Dr. Todd is showing here was far from the climate at the time and for yrs after. I wonder how the burglar story came about.. you probably know more than I do.
@@cassondralynch6342 I know what doc you're talking about. It was bought and paid for by the Peterson family.
The manufacturer of Scott's boat testified as to its stability at his trial. I'm not surprised you had doubts after watching that series. That was their goal.
@@sophie8394 It's not surprising either the manufacturer of anything would testify to it's adequacy. I don't disbelieve you, but how do you know the Peterson's were behind it? None of them produced it according to IMDB.
What’s crazy is if this happened today every house would have cameras, we would know what day for sure the house was robbed across the street and when Laci was last seen walking the dog. Case would be solved in 5 min. This case drives me crazy because it seems obvious that he did it, especially the home made anchors and no rope. Just wish it was a rock solid case
I don't know how long after the event you read comments. I was struck by your account the police response to Scott Peterson's behaviour when his wife was missing and people may respond to stressful and distressing events in different ways. Many years ago I worked as an advisor in an advice centre. A woman came in wanting advice on state benefits she could claim in the wake of her husband's suicide. I said how sorry I was about his death and her loss. She said words along the lines of I'm not sorry. I'm furious. I could kill him. That day I learned not to make assumptions about how people feel and what grief looks like.
I heard the pregnant woman seen walking her dog came forward and she was pregnant, had the same type of dog, and was walking in the same area....I believe Scott Peterson is guilty as hell.
Calvena Ainsworth no. You’re wrong.
@@britanny5363ify How so?
"11 eye witnesses saw her after"... I'm not saying he's innocent, I dont know the case well enough to make any assumption. I just happened to read this comment at the moment Dr. Grande started talking about the alleged eye witnesses lol
This is hear say. Unless you can identify a press report or interview with the second pregnant woman, the person who told you that can simply be making it up, or repeating something someone else invented. There are even alternate suspects. This conviction is not safe.
Let me see this in writing. So much of the Scott Peterson case are rumors and not fact. There was no other woman who had Laci’s exact description walking the same dog. That’s a rumor.
AND on Xmas Eve day when you have so much to do and are expected for dinner at your inlaws that evening, you leave your largely pregnant wife alone for a whole day to go out fishing in the bay - after telling people it was too cold to go golfing! And return with no fish and cannot name what bait you used or where you got it from........
@Sumridge Why did he tell Amber he was in Paris for New Years when he was just down the street at Lacis candle light vigil? Why did he hide from the media and refuse to go up on the podium with the rest of the family? I heard his laughing joking call to Amber in the middle of that vigil. Why did he refuse the polygraph and then lie and tell everyone he had taken it and passed? He is a pathological lair and a sociopath and only a half wit couldn't see that.
@Sumridge Avoiding her? But he was still trying to see her and buying her a gift even after he knew she was talking to the police. If he was avoiding her all he had to do was change his phone number or use call blocker, as I have done for nuisances and stalkers. He was hiding the fact that he had been lying to her about being married and didn't want her to see him on the news in connection with the case.......he could have just told her he couldn't see her over New Year because he had family obligations.........and he did tell her, when she found out he was married, that he had "lost his wife". As she asked him "how did you lose your wife a week before she went missing"?
I would suggest anyone interested in this case goes to Stephanie Harlowe's channel and watch the 3-part series she did on this case. She goes deep into this case.
Kara Bee : Thank you so much for telling us about Stephanie's channel... can't wait to start...but is 3:30 am .
I love her so much
Thanks. I'll look into it.
Stephanie Harlowe is the QUEEN
How would I find this channel?