SII, aka PWC-SII, is temporarily unavailable due to server problems. As of this time, the home page is accessible and a few main links, but not everything on the site. I am working to get this resolved as quickly as possible, but it make take a few days.
Soon, the URL will start linking back to this blog -- so everyone will know what is going on.
I'm sorry for the inconvenience, but such is life with the internet -- glitches and downtime are just a part of life.
UPDATE, June 17: The problem was easier to fix than I thought. Everything should be okay now, as all the page links appear to work and appear to be the most current.
If you notice that something is missing, or appears outdated, then let me know.
Thursday, June 17, 2010
Friday, June 11, 2010
The Joran Van der Sloot debacle
We again witness an outrageous injustice -- the public lynching of Joran Van der Sloot for the death of Stephany Flores in Lima, Peru.
I'm absolutely appalled at the inflammatory information that is being fed to the media by the Peruvian police and public authorities and gulped down by the public.
So much of what we were told Van der Sloot said and did is already proven to be false, but it just keeps coming, and with each new release, Van der Sloot becomes ever more despicable.
In my opinion, what the Modesto Police Department and the Stanislaus County DAs did to publicly malign Scott Peterson's character with blatant lies pales in comparison to what is going on in Lima, Peru.
I used to blame the media for what happens in these public lynchings, as, at least in the United States, they have a Constitutional responsibility to protect citizens against an abusive government, but the buck stops with the police agency investigating the crime. And this police agency, along with Peruvian public officials, are raping the criminal justice system and destroying all hopes that Joran Van der Sloot will get a fair trial.
Shame on anyone who aids and abets this gross injustice.
This has nothing to do with his guilt or innocence, in either the Flores death or the Holloway disappearance -- it has everything to do with letting the criminal justice system work in a fair and judicious way.
Is there reason to suspect Van der Sloot is responsible for Flores' death? Of course there is. He's seen on video entering his hotel room with her and then leaving alone and she was found dead in that room. However, that does not justify a public lynching based on the outrageous leaking of highly inflammatory and blatantly false information. If Joran Van der Sloot is in fact responsible for this woman's murder, then let the evidence prove it in a court of law.
But since so many inflammatory stories have already proven to be false, I very much suspect that there is no substantial evidence against Van der Sloot, thus the need to convict him in a public trial so as to ensure conviction when he goes to his Court trial.
This stinks to high heaven . . . and I dearly hope someone in Peru steps up to the plate and puts an abrupt end to this mockery of justice. But I fear that Peru is more interested in getting the glory for bringing Van der Sloot down than in protecting and defending its justice system.
If you wish to discuss the Joran Van der Sloot case, please visit The Justice Gang.
I'm absolutely appalled at the inflammatory information that is being fed to the media by the Peruvian police and public authorities and gulped down by the public.
So much of what we were told Van der Sloot said and did is already proven to be false, but it just keeps coming, and with each new release, Van der Sloot becomes ever more despicable.
In my opinion, what the Modesto Police Department and the Stanislaus County DAs did to publicly malign Scott Peterson's character with blatant lies pales in comparison to what is going on in Lima, Peru.
I used to blame the media for what happens in these public lynchings, as, at least in the United States, they have a Constitutional responsibility to protect citizens against an abusive government, but the buck stops with the police agency investigating the crime. And this police agency, along with Peruvian public officials, are raping the criminal justice system and destroying all hopes that Joran Van der Sloot will get a fair trial.
Shame on anyone who aids and abets this gross injustice.
This has nothing to do with his guilt or innocence, in either the Flores death or the Holloway disappearance -- it has everything to do with letting the criminal justice system work in a fair and judicious way.
Is there reason to suspect Van der Sloot is responsible for Flores' death? Of course there is. He's seen on video entering his hotel room with her and then leaving alone and she was found dead in that room. However, that does not justify a public lynching based on the outrageous leaking of highly inflammatory and blatantly false information. If Joran Van der Sloot is in fact responsible for this woman's murder, then let the evidence prove it in a court of law.
But since so many inflammatory stories have already proven to be false, I very much suspect that there is no substantial evidence against Van der Sloot, thus the need to convict him in a public trial so as to ensure conviction when he goes to his Court trial.
This stinks to high heaven . . . and I dearly hope someone in Peru steps up to the plate and puts an abrupt end to this mockery of justice. But I fear that Peru is more interested in getting the glory for bringing Van der Sloot down than in protecting and defending its justice system.
If you wish to discuss the Joran Van der Sloot case, please visit The Justice Gang.
Monday, June 7, 2010
Visit the new Facebook page on Scott Peterson
A new Facebook page has emerged on Scott Peterson. Click here.
Kudos to the individual who has taken the time to make these succinct statements of fact in contrast to the blatant lies and half-truths promulgated by the media.
Please visit the page and click the Like button. It's important for everyone who agrees with the contents of this Facebook page to stand up and be counted.
Kudos to the individual who has taken the time to make these succinct statements of fact in contrast to the blatant lies and half-truths promulgated by the media.
Please visit the page and click the Like button. It's important for everyone who agrees with the contents of this Facebook page to stand up and be counted.
Friday, May 7, 2010
Was Scott Peterson framed?
Webster's online dictionary defines frame, in the context of our criminal system, as follows:
3 a : to devise falsely (as a criminal charge) b : to contrive the evidence against (an innocent person) so that a verdict of guilty is assured
ADA Rick Distaso, in his Closing Argument, again scoffed at the idea that someone framed Scott Peterson. Here are his comments, in italics, with some corrections, as Mr. Distaso never seems to get his facts straight.
Now, why is that important? Well, let's jump ahead to, let's go all the way back to when I started this morning and said Okay, Laci and Conner washed up right where the defendant was. So that's a fact. Proven fact. I can't say anything about it. The only other way, either he did it, of course, or somebody put the bodies there to frame him. Distaso obviously lives in an "only two choices" alternate universe. So if those are the two choices, and since we know Scott Peterson didn't do it, then he obviously was framed.
And I'm going to talk about what possible reason you would have to frame an unsuccessful fertilizer salesman in Modesto. Unsuccessful by whose standard? According to Brent and his wife Rose, Scott and Laci were better off than they were. In fact, they marvelled at how well Scott and Laci were doing. As I recall, there was quite a bit of jealousy among different family members over how well Scott and Laci were doing. Doesn't sound unsuccessful to me.
But before we get there, let's look at how somebody, or why somebody would frame, you know, anyone. Let's take Scott Peterson out of it for a second. He should have never been in the mix in the first place. But let's do take him out of it, send him a packing, and get going on the business of identifying, arresting, and convicting the persons guilty of Laci's abduction and murder. Here's a hint, Mr. Distaso, three of them have the initials SWT, DGP, AT. The other three you'll have to depend on the MPD to identify. Perhaps with the right detective in charge this time, the case can be successfully solved.
If you're going to frame somebody, that means you're going to try to pin the crime on them, right? So let's say I'm this faceless bad person that has abducted Laci Peterson. Somehow I figured out exactly where the defendant went, because I would have to know exactly where he went fishing in order to put the bodies right where he went. . It wouldn't be hard for any faceless bad guy to figure out where Scott Peterson went, since he told everyone that very night where he went, and the MPD advertised it within a week, even identifying the exact fishing route. It's not rocket science, Mr. Distaso. Everyone and his dog knew where Scott Peterson went fishing that day.
And I want, I want the bodies to be there, or at least to be found, so that the suspicion will go onto Scott Peterson. What possible, here's how you know without any doubt that that's not true. What possible reason would there be then to weight down or hide the bodies so they aren't found for, what, four, four and a half months, whatever it is. There you go again, talking about those mythical weights. Who on earth would weigh down a body in 5-10 feet of water frequently used for recreational water sports? Duh! And it was 3 1/2 months, or 112 days to be exact. You and Devore have quite a difficulty counting on your fingers. Perhaps you should use a pencil and paper calendar.
If you're going to pin it on somebody, that means you're going to want to make it look like they did it. If you want to make it look like they did it, you put the body right up on the shore right out of the gate. Maybe you put it ten feet off the shore, but you're not going to put it so it's hidden in the water so nobody finds it, because how is that possibly framing Scott Peterson? 10 feet off the shore? Well, you'd better be sure they get on the right side of the debris line, else you're sure to call attention to yourself. But I must say, Mr. Distaso, you make a very good case that Laci's abductors are not the ones who put the bodies were they were found. Hmm, who else had motive to "frame" Scott Peterson, not because they wanted to frame an innocent man, but because millions of dollars spent by multiple agencies produced no evidence against the man they were all so very convinced, so 1000% absolutely sure, was guilty. Not a single shred of evidence. In other words, they thought it justifiable to frame a guilty man. Noble cause. The end justifies the means. We all know he did it, we just can't prove it. Well, is that why and how the bodies got where they were found? In Distaso's "only two choices" alternate universe, that's the only other choice.
The only reason these bodies were found, yeah, the defendant put them in the water with weights on them. There you go with the mythical weights again. Again, I ask, why would you weight down a body in 5-10 feet of water frequently used for recreational water sports?
The only reason they were found is not because of some frame-up job or somebody all of a sudden said Let's raise them up and pin it on Scott Peterson. Why would anybody do that? They've gotten away with it for four months and now all of a sudden they're going to raise the bodies so suspicion will go to him? Excellent point, and another reason to point to alternative #2 -- who spent millions of dollars and involved multiple agencies and produced no evidence?
No. I mean that's ridiculous. Ludicrous. It's not reasonable. It didn't happen. Methinks the gentleman doth protest too much.
The only reason those bodies were found is remember what Dr. Cheng testified to. There was an extremely low tide on February 12th. And there was a very violent storm on February 12th. That combination broke the, broke Laci Peterson free and sent her floating towards the shore. That's the only reason that those bodies were found at all. Not because of some magical frame-up job, or for any other reason. One problem, Mr. Distaso, which I suppose we shouldn't have expected you to double check Dr. Cheng's work, but next time a man's life is on the line, you might want to. Dr. Cheng fabricated that "very violent storm." Nowhere in the vicinity of the Bay were winds experienced that he described. And, if you had been smart enough to check the tidal data published by the NOAA, you would have known that there was not an "extremely low tide" on Feb. 12 - another of Dr. Cheng's fabrications. Finally, if you had even an ounce of sense you would have checked the PVD to see if it even connected the dots - which it didn't. It's at the wrong place for the storm and it has Conner still well off-shore when the high tide came in that morning. So, there must be another reason why the bodies were found on April 13 and April 14, one which had nothing at all to do with the storm or with the tides.
And if that's the fact, and that's the evidence that was before you in this case, then that man's a murderer. It's as simple as that. It's not the fact, simple as that. That fact as you call it is only one of the many blatant lies told by various witnesses and experts at the trial you oversaw, so you, Mr. Distaso, are personally responsible for every half-truth, distorted truth, and blatant lie that was told.
Again I ask, Was Scott Peterson framed?
3 a : to devise falsely (as a criminal charge) b : to contrive the evidence against (an innocent person) so that a verdict of guilty is assured
ADA Rick Distaso, in his Closing Argument, again scoffed at the idea that someone framed Scott Peterson. Here are his comments, in italics, with some corrections, as Mr. Distaso never seems to get his facts straight.
Now, why is that important? Well, let's jump ahead to, let's go all the way back to when I started this morning and said Okay, Laci and Conner washed up right where the defendant was. So that's a fact. Proven fact. I can't say anything about it. The only other way, either he did it, of course, or somebody put the bodies there to frame him. Distaso obviously lives in an "only two choices" alternate universe. So if those are the two choices, and since we know Scott Peterson didn't do it, then he obviously was framed.
And I'm going to talk about what possible reason you would have to frame an unsuccessful fertilizer salesman in Modesto. Unsuccessful by whose standard? According to Brent and his wife Rose, Scott and Laci were better off than they were. In fact, they marvelled at how well Scott and Laci were doing. As I recall, there was quite a bit of jealousy among different family members over how well Scott and Laci were doing. Doesn't sound unsuccessful to me.
But before we get there, let's look at how somebody, or why somebody would frame, you know, anyone. Let's take Scott Peterson out of it for a second. He should have never been in the mix in the first place. But let's do take him out of it, send him a packing, and get going on the business of identifying, arresting, and convicting the persons guilty of Laci's abduction and murder. Here's a hint, Mr. Distaso, three of them have the initials SWT, DGP, AT. The other three you'll have to depend on the MPD to identify. Perhaps with the right detective in charge this time, the case can be successfully solved.
If you're going to frame somebody, that means you're going to try to pin the crime on them, right? So let's say I'm this faceless bad person that has abducted Laci Peterson. Somehow I figured out exactly where the defendant went, because I would have to know exactly where he went fishing in order to put the bodies right where he went. . It wouldn't be hard for any faceless bad guy to figure out where Scott Peterson went, since he told everyone that very night where he went, and the MPD advertised it within a week, even identifying the exact fishing route. It's not rocket science, Mr. Distaso. Everyone and his dog knew where Scott Peterson went fishing that day.
And I want, I want the bodies to be there, or at least to be found, so that the suspicion will go onto Scott Peterson. What possible, here's how you know without any doubt that that's not true. What possible reason would there be then to weight down or hide the bodies so they aren't found for, what, four, four and a half months, whatever it is. There you go again, talking about those mythical weights. Who on earth would weigh down a body in 5-10 feet of water frequently used for recreational water sports? Duh! And it was 3 1/2 months, or 112 days to be exact. You and Devore have quite a difficulty counting on your fingers. Perhaps you should use a pencil and paper calendar.
If you're going to pin it on somebody, that means you're going to want to make it look like they did it. If you want to make it look like they did it, you put the body right up on the shore right out of the gate. Maybe you put it ten feet off the shore, but you're not going to put it so it's hidden in the water so nobody finds it, because how is that possibly framing Scott Peterson? 10 feet off the shore? Well, you'd better be sure they get on the right side of the debris line, else you're sure to call attention to yourself. But I must say, Mr. Distaso, you make a very good case that Laci's abductors are not the ones who put the bodies were they were found. Hmm, who else had motive to "frame" Scott Peterson, not because they wanted to frame an innocent man, but because millions of dollars spent by multiple agencies produced no evidence against the man they were all so very convinced, so 1000% absolutely sure, was guilty. Not a single shred of evidence. In other words, they thought it justifiable to frame a guilty man. Noble cause. The end justifies the means. We all know he did it, we just can't prove it. Well, is that why and how the bodies got where they were found? In Distaso's "only two choices" alternate universe, that's the only other choice.
The only reason these bodies were found, yeah, the defendant put them in the water with weights on them. There you go with the mythical weights again. Again, I ask, why would you weight down a body in 5-10 feet of water frequently used for recreational water sports?
The only reason they were found is not because of some frame-up job or somebody all of a sudden said Let's raise them up and pin it on Scott Peterson. Why would anybody do that? They've gotten away with it for four months and now all of a sudden they're going to raise the bodies so suspicion will go to him? Excellent point, and another reason to point to alternative #2 -- who spent millions of dollars and involved multiple agencies and produced no evidence?
No. I mean that's ridiculous. Ludicrous. It's not reasonable. It didn't happen. Methinks the gentleman doth protest too much.
The only reason those bodies were found is remember what Dr. Cheng testified to. There was an extremely low tide on February 12th. And there was a very violent storm on February 12th. That combination broke the, broke Laci Peterson free and sent her floating towards the shore. That's the only reason that those bodies were found at all. Not because of some magical frame-up job, or for any other reason. One problem, Mr. Distaso, which I suppose we shouldn't have expected you to double check Dr. Cheng's work, but next time a man's life is on the line, you might want to. Dr. Cheng fabricated that "very violent storm." Nowhere in the vicinity of the Bay were winds experienced that he described. And, if you had been smart enough to check the tidal data published by the NOAA, you would have known that there was not an "extremely low tide" on Feb. 12 - another of Dr. Cheng's fabrications. Finally, if you had even an ounce of sense you would have checked the PVD to see if it even connected the dots - which it didn't. It's at the wrong place for the storm and it has Conner still well off-shore when the high tide came in that morning. So, there must be another reason why the bodies were found on April 13 and April 14, one which had nothing at all to do with the storm or with the tides.
And if that's the fact, and that's the evidence that was before you in this case, then that man's a murderer. It's as simple as that. It's not the fact, simple as that. That fact as you call it is only one of the many blatant lies told by various witnesses and experts at the trial you oversaw, so you, Mr. Distaso, are personally responsible for every half-truth, distorted truth, and blatant lie that was told.
Again I ask, Was Scott Peterson framed?
The Justice Gang is open, with a New Direction
When I opened The Justice Gang, I wanted an unrestricted conversation about what happened to Laci Peterson. I was foolish to think anyone that wasn't already convinced Scott was factually innocent could be persuaded by reasoned discussion. As always, when points couldn't be argued on their face, the contenders resorted to Scott's behavior: he had the affair, he didn't act like a grieving husband, who goes fishing 90 miles from home on Christmas Eve, blah blah blah.
So I closed the forum down. I have less patience than I thought with people who will not think out of the box and, worse yet, will not think for themselves. Scott was convicted, end of story, don't bother me with facts. Well, thank God someone questioned the validity of Raymond Towler's conviction, for which he served 30 years for a rape he did not commit. He has finally been proven innocent by DNA, although it took 6 years for the state of Ohio to get the testing done. Read about this recent exoneration at http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/05/05/dna-tests-vindicate-ohio-man-convicted-rape/
Because it takes such extraordinary efforts to exonerate a wrongfully convicted person, Scott needs all the help he can get. I know he has seasoned appellate attorneys working on his behalf, but ordinary people can help, too.
So The Justice Gang is open again. All the other forums remain the same. However, the Scott Peterson forum is to answer the question, "What happened to Laci Peterson?" with the automatic exclusion of all opinions that accuse Scott Peterson.
Let me repeat -- all opinions about what happened to Laci Peterson are welcome EXCEPT those that say Scott did it.
Posts in the Scott Peterson forum, or anywhere else, that suggest Scott is guilty, in any way, direct or indirect, knowingly or unwittingly, will be deleted. If another member replies to any such post, it will be deleted also.
Negative comments to this article will not be published.
So I closed the forum down. I have less patience than I thought with people who will not think out of the box and, worse yet, will not think for themselves. Scott was convicted, end of story, don't bother me with facts. Well, thank God someone questioned the validity of Raymond Towler's conviction, for which he served 30 years for a rape he did not commit. He has finally been proven innocent by DNA, although it took 6 years for the state of Ohio to get the testing done. Read about this recent exoneration at http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/05/05/dna-tests-vindicate-ohio-man-convicted-rape/
Because it takes such extraordinary efforts to exonerate a wrongfully convicted person, Scott needs all the help he can get. I know he has seasoned appellate attorneys working on his behalf, but ordinary people can help, too.
So The Justice Gang is open again. All the other forums remain the same. However, the Scott Peterson forum is to answer the question, "What happened to Laci Peterson?" with the automatic exclusion of all opinions that accuse Scott Peterson.
Let me repeat -- all opinions about what happened to Laci Peterson are welcome EXCEPT those that say Scott did it.
Posts in the Scott Peterson forum, or anywhere else, that suggest Scott is guilty, in any way, direct or indirect, knowingly or unwittingly, will be deleted. If another member replies to any such post, it will be deleted also.
Negative comments to this article will not be published.
Wednesday, March 17, 2010
Another sad anniversay
On March 16, 2005, Judge Delucchi sentenced Scott Peterson to death row. On March 17, at 3:10 a.m., Scott was transferred to San Quentin Prison.
This horrific injustice resulted from many mistakes made along the way, the most destructive being the tunnel vision that descended on the Modesto Police Department the first night Laci was missing. That tunnel vision not only corrupted the judgment of the MPD, but also the media and the general public -- Scarce anyone could see anything that pointed in any other direction than Scott Peterson.
This tunnel vision is most apparent by the ridiculous dismissal of the Medina burglars from involvement in Laci's disappearance. The MPD had a neighbor report seeing a van with 3-suspicious looking men and a safe being removed from the Medina home at 11:40 on December 24. Yet, the MPD was all too anxious to remove the burglars as suspects so they could proceed unhampered with their investigation of Scott Peterson.
After the arrest of Todd and Pearce, the Modesto Bee published an extensive article with information about the MPD's dismissal of the burglars as suspects in Laci's disappearance. These quotes are taken from page A-14.
"It was bad luck on their part," Stough said. [Steven Todd] said he was scared that he was going to be associated with Laci's disappearance.
Was he scared about being associated with Laci's disappearance because he was actually involved, or because he figured he would be the scapegoat if the MPD couldn't solve the case? No reason to fear, Mr. Todd - the MPD already had its sights fixed on Scott Peterson.
"Todd told investigators that he traveled the La Loma area often and recognized a home that looked empty the morning after Christmas. He said he and Pearce entered the home about 4 a.m. and stayed for about 3 1/2 hours, Stough said." Stough was the lead detective for the Medina burglary.
The article goes on to say:
Police had not yet sealed off the [Peterson] house as part of their search, and officers had not taken up positions in the neighborhood at that early hour. Todd said he saw several TV news trucks in the area, so he picked a different entry into the home. Police said the burglars carried a large safe out the front door and onto the front lawn. The safe contained $50,000 worth of jewelry and other items, according to police.
Isn't that what Diane Jackson saw -- a safe being removed from the house? But she saw it at 11:40 a.m. the morning of December 24. Todd says that happened on the morning of the 26th. Who do you believe, Jackson or Todd?
And does anyone else find it ridiculous that Todd "picked a different entry into the home" because of the "several TV news trucks in the area," but hauled the safe out the front door and across the front lawn?!?
The article continues:
None of the reporters or crews in those trucks reported seeing or hearing anything suspicious, Stough said. Duh, that's because there wasn't anything suspicious happening on the morning of the 26th for them to see, because the burglary happened on the 24th, just as Diane Jackson reported.
It's not long after the burglars were arrested that the MPD was told of a phone conversation between the Tenbrink brothers, in which Adam Tenbrink said Laci came up on the burglary and Todd verbally threatened her. Yet, the MPD refused to take another look at Todd and Pearce as suspects in Laci's disappearance.
The MPD didn't fixate on Scott Peterson because it had no other suspects; it refused to adequately investigate other suspects because it was already fixated on Scott Peterson.
After the infamous Lizzie Borden's acquittal in 1893, the New York Times reported:
"It will be a certain relief to every right-minded man or woman who has followed the case to learn that the jury at New Bedford has not only acquitted Miss Lizzie Borden of the atrocious crime with which she was charged, but has done so with a promptness that was very significant." The Times added that it considered the verdict "a condemnation of the police authorities of Fall River who secured the indictment and have conducted the trial." Not stopping there, the Times editorialist blasted the "vanity of ignorant and untrained men charged with the detection of crime" in smaller cities--the police in Fall River, the editorial concluded, are "the usual inept and stupid and muddle-headed sort that such towns manage to get for themselves." (Source)
Not all small-town police are inept, stupid, or muddle-headed, but the MPD's dismissal of the Medina burglars as suspects in Laci's disappearance certainly qualifies them for that characterization.
This horrific injustice resulted from many mistakes made along the way, the most destructive being the tunnel vision that descended on the Modesto Police Department the first night Laci was missing. That tunnel vision not only corrupted the judgment of the MPD, but also the media and the general public -- Scarce anyone could see anything that pointed in any other direction than Scott Peterson.
This tunnel vision is most apparent by the ridiculous dismissal of the Medina burglars from involvement in Laci's disappearance. The MPD had a neighbor report seeing a van with 3-suspicious looking men and a safe being removed from the Medina home at 11:40 on December 24. Yet, the MPD was all too anxious to remove the burglars as suspects so they could proceed unhampered with their investigation of Scott Peterson.
After the arrest of Todd and Pearce, the Modesto Bee published an extensive article with information about the MPD's dismissal of the burglars as suspects in Laci's disappearance. These quotes are taken from page A-14.
"It was bad luck on their part," Stough said. [Steven Todd] said he was scared that he was going to be associated with Laci's disappearance.
Was he scared about being associated with Laci's disappearance because he was actually involved, or because he figured he would be the scapegoat if the MPD couldn't solve the case? No reason to fear, Mr. Todd - the MPD already had its sights fixed on Scott Peterson.
"Todd told investigators that he traveled the La Loma area often and recognized a home that looked empty the morning after Christmas. He said he and Pearce entered the home about 4 a.m. and stayed for about 3 1/2 hours, Stough said." Stough was the lead detective for the Medina burglary.
The article goes on to say:
Police had not yet sealed off the [Peterson] house as part of their search, and officers had not taken up positions in the neighborhood at that early hour. Todd said he saw several TV news trucks in the area, so he picked a different entry into the home. Police said the burglars carried a large safe out the front door and onto the front lawn. The safe contained $50,000 worth of jewelry and other items, according to police.
Isn't that what Diane Jackson saw -- a safe being removed from the house? But she saw it at 11:40 a.m. the morning of December 24. Todd says that happened on the morning of the 26th. Who do you believe, Jackson or Todd?
And does anyone else find it ridiculous that Todd "picked a different entry into the home" because of the "several TV news trucks in the area," but hauled the safe out the front door and across the front lawn?!?
The article continues:
None of the reporters or crews in those trucks reported seeing or hearing anything suspicious, Stough said. Duh, that's because there wasn't anything suspicious happening on the morning of the 26th for them to see, because the burglary happened on the 24th, just as Diane Jackson reported.
It's not long after the burglars were arrested that the MPD was told of a phone conversation between the Tenbrink brothers, in which Adam Tenbrink said Laci came up on the burglary and Todd verbally threatened her. Yet, the MPD refused to take another look at Todd and Pearce as suspects in Laci's disappearance.
The MPD didn't fixate on Scott Peterson because it had no other suspects; it refused to adequately investigate other suspects because it was already fixated on Scott Peterson.
After the infamous Lizzie Borden's acquittal in 1893, the New York Times reported:
"It will be a certain relief to every right-minded man or woman who has followed the case to learn that the jury at New Bedford has not only acquitted Miss Lizzie Borden of the atrocious crime with which she was charged, but has done so with a promptness that was very significant." The Times added that it considered the verdict "a condemnation of the police authorities of Fall River who secured the indictment and have conducted the trial." Not stopping there, the Times editorialist blasted the "vanity of ignorant and untrained men charged with the detection of crime" in smaller cities--the police in Fall River, the editorial concluded, are "the usual inept and stupid and muddle-headed sort that such towns manage to get for themselves." (Source)
Not all small-town police are inept, stupid, or muddle-headed, but the MPD's dismissal of the Medina burglars as suspects in Laci's disappearance certainly qualifies them for that characterization.
Thursday, December 17, 2009
Susan Powell, Mom of 2 missing in Utah
Susan Powell has been missing for more than 10 days, and "the-husband-did-it" lynch mob is out in full force. This is not a defense of Josh Powell. I have no knowledge of his guilt or innocence.
What I do know is that he was suspected from the very beginning - no, I don't believe the lines the police give about persons of interest. It's just as intentionally deceptive as the smoke and mirrors used by magicians.
Where is the evidence of foul play in the house? or of a clean-up? or of drugs or poisons used to kill her? of her body being dragged out of the house? As a parent and grandparent, I know how notorious children are for tattle-taling, and they don't have to be intending to do it, either, they just mess up on the story, or say something unexpected in answer to a question (recall the balloon family escapade, not long ago?)
I assume there is no such evidence, and the 4 year old has said nothing incriminating towards his dad, or the dad would have been arrested.
What is it about these cases that compels otherwise decent human beings to turn with a vengeance on someone they don't even know? Oh, everyone justifies it by pointing out the behavior that is peculiar. And they justify it by claiming they want justice for the victim. In truth, they are no better than the persons who tried and convicted the innocent men and women of Salem Mass for witchcraft -- all because their behavior was a little peculiar. Posting a hateful, ugly, mean-spirited mobocratic message on a message forum or in the comments following an article is no less dangerous to our civilization, and no less anti-Christian and immoral.
Whatever happened to Susan Powell (and I still pray for her safe return), and no matter what the involvement or non-involvement by her husband, nothing justifies this hate-filled rush to judgment by the general public, before even one shred of evidence is produced.
"I'm afraid he may have something to do with it," is not the same as saying, "He did it, they just don't have the evidence to prove it."
How horribly unjust is that last statement? Think about it! How many people in America would be perfectly satisfied to take Josh Powell out to the nearest tree right now and hang him? Without one shred of evidence.
I wonder how many people want him to be guilty, to satisfy some voyeuristic need to see into the private relationships of other people. Are our own lives so boring?
If Josh Powell proves to be involved, everyone will justify their anti-Christian, mobocratic attitude towards him in these initial days. Even if he isn't involved, and proven not to be involved, I doubt that anyone will learn any lessons from this. We didn't seem to learn from Richard Jewell's witch-hunt, nor Elisabeth Smart's. In fact, I dare to say people were disappointed that Jewell was innocent, and that Smart was kidnapped by someone other than their suspect. As Nancy Grace is so prone to say, "they were the logical suspects," so no apologies and certainly no change of behavior required.
As a civilization, America is fast sinking into a cesspool.
What I do know is that he was suspected from the very beginning - no, I don't believe the lines the police give about persons of interest. It's just as intentionally deceptive as the smoke and mirrors used by magicians.
Where is the evidence of foul play in the house? or of a clean-up? or of drugs or poisons used to kill her? of her body being dragged out of the house? As a parent and grandparent, I know how notorious children are for tattle-taling, and they don't have to be intending to do it, either, they just mess up on the story, or say something unexpected in answer to a question (recall the balloon family escapade, not long ago?)
I assume there is no such evidence, and the 4 year old has said nothing incriminating towards his dad, or the dad would have been arrested.
What is it about these cases that compels otherwise decent human beings to turn with a vengeance on someone they don't even know? Oh, everyone justifies it by pointing out the behavior that is peculiar. And they justify it by claiming they want justice for the victim. In truth, they are no better than the persons who tried and convicted the innocent men and women of Salem Mass for witchcraft -- all because their behavior was a little peculiar. Posting a hateful, ugly, mean-spirited mobocratic message on a message forum or in the comments following an article is no less dangerous to our civilization, and no less anti-Christian and immoral.
Whatever happened to Susan Powell (and I still pray for her safe return), and no matter what the involvement or non-involvement by her husband, nothing justifies this hate-filled rush to judgment by the general public, before even one shred of evidence is produced.
"I'm afraid he may have something to do with it," is not the same as saying, "He did it, they just don't have the evidence to prove it."
How horribly unjust is that last statement? Think about it! How many people in America would be perfectly satisfied to take Josh Powell out to the nearest tree right now and hang him? Without one shred of evidence.
I wonder how many people want him to be guilty, to satisfy some voyeuristic need to see into the private relationships of other people. Are our own lives so boring?
If Josh Powell proves to be involved, everyone will justify their anti-Christian, mobocratic attitude towards him in these initial days. Even if he isn't involved, and proven not to be involved, I doubt that anyone will learn any lessons from this. We didn't seem to learn from Richard Jewell's witch-hunt, nor Elisabeth Smart's. In fact, I dare to say people were disappointed that Jewell was innocent, and that Smart was kidnapped by someone other than their suspect. As Nancy Grace is so prone to say, "they were the logical suspects," so no apologies and certainly no change of behavior required.
As a civilization, America is fast sinking into a cesspool.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)