Scott Peterson's attorney knew what he was doing the way he threw doubt after doubt out there. While she was still a missing person, the possibility she had left, the mysterious van in the neighborhood...the possibility she was taken because someone wanted the baby...

Then there was the juror who was allegedly smitten with Peterson & his Ben Affleckish looks. I think it was the autopsy photos that did her in finally. But as far as Drew, unless something more incriminating than him "looking guilty" comes up, there's no way in hell he will ever be convicted of her murder. The first wife yes. But not the missing one.

It's one thing to look guilty, but it's another thing completely to consider the fact that he has never once been concerned that Stacey would reappear and ruin his new life. She left her children behind, they have to be suffering. If nothing else, an innocent person who believed she simply walked out and wasn't missing or dead, would be on TV asking her to come home, see her kids, don't put them through this, let's get a divorce and make it final, SOMETHING that would imply he knows or at least thinks she's out there. He knows she's never coming back, that is not just looking guilty.

Supernova wrote:

It's one thing to look guilty, but it's another thing completely to consider the fact that he has never once been concerned that Stacey would reappear and ruin his new life. She left her children behind, they have to be suffering. If nothing else, an innocent person who believed she simply walked out and wasn't missing or dead, would be on TV asking her to come home, see her kids, don't put them through this, let's get a divorce and make it final, SOMETHING that would imply he knows or at least thinks she's out there. He knows she's never coming back, that is not just looking guilty.

Don't get me wrong. I think he's guilty. But with what's been released so far I couldn't vote to convict. Reasonable doubt is there. His lack of concern "could be" that there was no love in the marriage anymore. "Maybe" she was a rotten wife & mother. "Maybe" so many things had happened behind closed doors he wasn't sorry she was gone. A lack of feelings doesn't mean someone is a murderer. She "could have" just left. I don't think she did, but that's just a personal opinion. Not good enough to convict. There's just too much possibility right now. And that is reasonable doubt. As is, he walks.

A couple months back there was an episode of Forensic Files about a wife who went missing. Her husband wasn't concerned, in fact he didn't say one word about her being gone. Her brother and sister broke into the house one day when he was gone and found at face value, no signs of foul play. Then they come to the bedroom and flip the mattress and box spring and find it covered in blood, HER blood. But that was the ONLY thing they had to go on, no murder weapon, NO body, only a bloody mattress which he claimed was her menstrual blood, if you saw the pictures you'd be going uh-HELL NO too...but, they have no proof she's actually dead, only a woman who's missing, and her blood on a mattress, but they gave the guy life anyway.

Supernova wrote:

A couple months back there was an episode of Forensic Files about a wife who went missing. Her husband wasn't concerned, in fact he didn't say one word about her being gone. Her brother and sister broke into the house one day when he was gone and found at face value, no signs of foul play. Then they come to the bedroom and flip the mattress and box spring and find it covered in blood, HER blood. But that was the ONLY thing they had to go on, no murder weapon, NO body, only a bloody mattress which he claimed was her menstrual blood, if you saw the pictures you'd be going uh-HELL NO too...but, they have no proof she's actually dead, only a woman who's missing, and her blood on a mattress, but they gave the guy life anyway.

A phenomenal amount of blood, especially when it indicates most of a humans blood volume is going to be greater evidence than someone who just disappeared.




And the two cases with the similarities in names is really screwing this thread up lol

Nystyle709 wrote:

This is your thread isn't it?

NY, you are talking about Laci & SCOTT Peterson, the pregnant woman from california. The thread started with DREW Peterson, and ex cop who was married 4 times. The 3rd wife was found in the tub dead, and his 4th wife disappeared without a trace. The movie about DREW peterson was on tonight.

Drew was convicted of killing the 3rd wife after his 4th wife disappeared. He is NOT doing any time for the 4th wife.

As for not knowing if someone is dead--- people use credit cards, social security numbers, bank accounts. Without these, it is pretty hard to live. And unless you know some unscrupulous people, it is hard to get fakes. When it comes to the 4th wife, the thought has crossed my mind that perhaps she went in hiding with the help of a battered woman's shelter. Thinking that she would come back later for the kids---but when she didnt return for the kids once he was convicted for the 3rd wife's murder, it was evident she wasnt coming back.

There was some comparison between the two cases being discussed but they've begun to meld lol The names are probably the culprit there. That said, I think Stacy Peterson is probably dead but unless that blue barrel is found or any accomplice wants to clear their conscience, this will remain just another unsolved case.

LOL... definitely never get involved with a guy with that name! LOL

Nystyle709 wrote:

Oh okay....my bad. I don't know why I'm interchanging the two. Guess Peterson is an infamous name for killing wives.

The dead/missing women's names being Stacy & Laci probably contribute to it too.

Never heard of this guy b4.

wants2laugh wrote:

LOL... definitely never get involved with a guy with that name! LOL

That's what I said.