|If Scott Peterson had murdered Laci, he would have been arrested by now.
On December 27, 2002, the authorities essentially determined that Scott Peterson had murdered his wife. They did not call Scott Peterson a murder suspect but members of the Stanislaus County Sheriff's Department were searching for a dead body and when officers served a warrant to search Laci's home, they cordoned off the Peterson house with crime-scene tape and actions speak louder than words.
In the meantime, Laci sightings were not thoroughly investigated because the authorities did not take the possibility that Laci was kidnapped from Dry Creek Regional Park, very seriously.
After a failed, 3 day search to locate the body of Laci Peterson, FBI crime-scene investigators and the police combed the Peterson home in effort to find evidence to prove that Scott Peterson had murdered his wife. The FBI used a chemical spray that can be used with an alternative light source to find trace evidence such as blood, and since the forensic evidence of the first search has been processed and returned to investigators, it is safe to assume that the Peterson home was not a crime scene. Indeed, even if Scott Peterson had mopped up all the blood, as persistently rumored, high-tech forensic investigators would have been able to prove it.
Unsolicited and unrehearsed testimony indicates that Laci Peterson was kidnapped on December 24, 2002, but the Police are like a dog with a bone on this one. They are evidently determined to prove that Scott Peterson murdered Laci on December 23rd and that he disposed of the body on the 24th, and they are doing everything conceivably possible, to prove a lie.
In late February, the police were under fire because widespread media reports about neighbors who had witnessed Laci walking her dog on Christmas eve, suggested that the police had wasted time investigating the wrong person. The police were not prepared to promote any suggestion beyond the claim that they are infallible. Instead of acknowledging the possibility that Laci was still alive on Christmas eve, the police countered the observations of independent witnesses with their own version of what an "independent" report is.
When the media focused on the neighbors who proved that Scott Peterson did not murder Laci on December 23, 2002, the police shifted the focus by making Scott Peterson's boat the object of intense speculation.
The follow-up search of the boat that Scott Peterson was in on the day Laci disappeared, reflects absolute desperation.
On February 26, 2003, the media reported the claim that Bruce Peterson, no relation to Scott, told police one life preserver was missing, as well as the boat's auxiliary wheels. He also noticed something else suspicious. "It looked like cement residue. Like the powdery stuff that comes out of the bag," Bruce Peterson, who sold the boat to Scott less than a month before Laci disappeared, says. "I just knew it wasn't that way when I sold it to him. I don't know what he used it for, if he was hauling stuff or anything."
Cement powder in Scott's boat, that the police refuse to confirm or deny, does not mean very much until the police produce a chunk of concrete to cement the case against Scott Peterson.
Laci sightings made the theory that Scott Peterson used cement to dispose of Laci's body irrelevant, but that did not bother
Capt. Greg Savelli, of the Investigative Services of the Modesto Police Department, who told KTVU's Ted Rowlands that his team meets every day to carefully piece together a battle plan.
"We meet every morning and discuss the goals of the case -- and for that day -- and where we are going," Savelli said. "We're confident in the direction of the investigation and we're going to follow all the leads we have."
"That's our plan -- as leads come in, they are developed and we will follow them."
One of those leads was to have Bruce Peterson -- the former Modesto resident who sold Scott Peterson his fishing boat weeks before Laci disappeared -- come in to look at the craft earlier this month.
"It's another piece of the puzzle," Savelli said.
The Modesto investigator also said his team watches the local and national media reports of Laci's disappearance with special interest.
"We are learning a lot of information from watching the media," he said. "In a sense that we want to hear from those shows what other experts feel about what they are hearing. It's important to us to get all opinions (on the case)."
On March 4, 2003, the zeal to cement the case against Scott Peterson was crystallized through the bold headline, SAN DIEGO DETECTIVE AIDS IN LACI PETERSON CASE.
The media stressed the fact that Bill Garcia, a Private Investigator from San Diego, found an unusual patch of cement without any guidance from the police. Is this a joke? Who is developing the pattern of "discovery" here?
The suggestion that cement powder in Scott's boat, a chunk of cement and a waterway is the key to solving the disappearance of Laci Peterson is a preposterous fiction. Clearly, the follow-up publicity that Scott's boat has received reflects absolutely nothing beyond the obsession to shift the focus away from persistent media reports that the police had inappropriately ignored Laci sightings. The police had Scott's boat in their custody for at least 60 days before they conveniently made it a focus of scrutiny and the current obsession to portray the impression that Scott Peterson used his boat to bury his wife in cement is grotesque fiction, it is not the evidence that a competent investigation has exposed.
In essence, when the police make Scott Peterson's boat the focus of their investigation, they promote the foolish claim that Scott Peterson used his boat to dumb Laci's body. The problem is, when you publicize unproven allegations, you create the opportunity to corrupt the process, and Private Investigators like Bill Garcia are more than willing to oblige.
The patch of cement Mr. Garcia found was deemed to be significant because it was in Stanislaus County, it was near water, and it was allegedly the only unusual patch of concrete in 20 to 30 miles that Mr. Garcia had searched. Who put it there? Moreover, the patch of concrete allegedly had a tire mark going through it, and that is clearly the sort of mark that would implicate Scott Peterson, given all the "follow-up" attention that all the evidence is receiving.
Ridenour said police did not ask Garcia to get involved in the case but they have talked with him about his findings.
Bill Garcia thinks that he can find evidence of Laci's disappearance by looking into what he calls the most "probable areas". Needless to say, as far as the Modesto Police Department is concerned, the most probable area is linked to Scott Peterson's boat.
One of Garcia's volunteers was responsible for locating Danielle van Dam's body, after the little girl was kidnapped, and Bill Garcia is the ideal celebrity P.I. to use for the purpose creating the impression that he is absolutely independent and that his choice of "probable area" is a genuine, contamination-free process.
On March 5, 2003, the very day that the Modesto Bee published the story that Bill Garcia spotted a chunk of cement by a waterway near Modesto, the police claimed that Laci Peterson, the Modesto woman missing since Christmas Eve, was a homicide victim.
Police spokesman Doug Ridenour would not elaborate on why or when the missing-person case became a homicide investigation.
He would not comment on a police visit to the path along the Delta-Mendota Canal where Bill Garcia said he found some spilled concrete mix.
Bill Garcia said the mix appeared to be marked with the track of a trailer tire.
Ridenour said police did not ask Garcia to get involved in the case, but have talked with him about his findings.
Those who do not understand the method and the manner that the National Enquirer uses to develop evidence, should appreciate the fact that the conjecture and the speculation that Bill Garcia and the police have encouraged is more than enough to hang an innocent man on.
The "cement residue" or dust in the boat is merely suggestive but the missing launch wheels are positively incriminating.
These wheels are used to allow the boater to park near the water, pull the boat off the trailer and push or pull it to the water's edge and launch it. No need for a ramp, you can launch in any area you drive fairly close to and have a clear enough path to pull the boat.
In other words, Scott Peterson, the devious murderer, drove to a remote area, no one around and used those wheels to launch the boat and dispose of Laci. No launch ramp, no witnesses.
Is that why the claim that the wheels are missing is reported after the follow-up search of Scott's boat?
Are Garcia and the police trying to suggest that Scott Peterson poured cement right there at the site he rolled the boat to, dumped out the leftover cement there on the ground by the water's edge and rolled through it with the launch wheels, either as he launched the boat or pulled it back out of the water to the boat trailer? Did he later notice the cement residue on the launch wheels and got rid of them both, but didn't realize he left a patch behind?
That appears to be the speculation that the police and Garcia are encouraging, but that sounds like a desperate follow-up, it doesn't sound like a competent, comprehensive, objective investigation.
If competent investigators had reviewed Scott's boat, they would have removed the wheels from the boat before taking their official pictures and they would have bagged them to preserve trace evidence and send them on for testing. Perhaps, the people who are in charge of this investigation did not find any evidence, and they think that these suggestive, follow-up searches will provide the opportunity to claim that Scott Peterson murdered his own wife. After all, there has to be a logical explanation for the fact that the wheels on Scott's boat are missing.
On Wednesday, March 5, 2003, the Modesto Police Department held a strange news conference to anounce the claim;
"This investigation began as a missing person case and we were all hopeful that Laci would return safely. However, we have come to consider that this is now a homicide case."
Craig Grogan, the department's lead homicide investigator said the homicide reclassification prompted a new $50,000 reward for "information that leads to her location and recovery." A $500,000 reward previously offered for tips leading to the woman's safe return also remains available.
People who discuss issued on message boards provide an instant reaction, and the following post reflects the confusion that this awkward press conference produced:
I find this very confusing also. "Brutal Homicide" did they actually say that?
Your question makes sense... [Why was it called a brutal homicide?] If they found a large amount of blood or something. Why in heavens name would they use that wording ..especially if the Rocha's were right there? Somethings mighty peculiar ..why these choice of words? What made it a homicide ...time? This was a weird conference... Asking the two donners if it was okay to give 50 K of the money to the finding of the body... (?) Unsettling...messy in some way...not neatly thought out. Like suddenly they decided to have a conference?"
After further thought, this confused poster inquired, "Why not a "KIDNAP" victim. What makes it a 'homicide'?"
Another poster said; "500K for her safe return 50K for just her return. I wish someone would just bring Laci home."
The website at lacipeterson.com changed its header for the HOME page, from "$500,00 reward for safe return" to "$50,000 REWARD FOR INFORMATION LEADING DIRECTLY TO THE RECOVERY OF LACI'S REMAINS."
Ted Rowlands quoted the Modesto Bee: "The Modesto Bee reported on Wednesday that investigators were going to return to the Mendota Canal area -- a region already searched by police and an army of volunteers -- to follow up on a report by a private investigator that he found cement residue near the shoreline." According to Rowlands, the MPD Press Conference is to update the investigation and make changes to the reward and the police are following up leads from private investigator Bill Garcia of San Diego, who reported finding spilled concrete and tire tracks near the Delta-Mendota canal. Rowlands claimed
the change in the wording of the reward is believed to be to accommodate an arrest in the case. The previous reward had been offered simply for information leading to her safe return.
Garcia made what he characterized as an unusual discovery right next to the Delta Mendota Canal at a specific location
he did not wish publicly disclosed [What's the big secret?] but which he said he had reported to Modesto police on Monday, March 3rd. It was an irregularly-shaped cement mix spill that was about three feet wide at its widest and perhaps three to four feet across. He guessed it to be no more than a few inches thick at its thickest point. He said it looked to him like someone had parked a vehicle next to the canal and was then handling or removing from it some cement mix that was then accidentally spilled. He said he could not be certain if the mix was in dry powder form when it spilled and was then subsequently rained upon and then hardened, or if it was already mixed with water and was spilled in that form. But in either case, there was a distinct tire track through it that looked to him like that of a smaller tire such as what might be found on a boat or some other kind of trailer. Garcia admitted he had no way of determining it with any degree of certainty, but it looked to him like the concrete patch had not been there very long -- perhaps two or three months, at the most. Needless to say, if it had been there any longer than that, Garcia would not be able to say that Scott Peterson used the cement to bury Laci Peterson.
“It was interesting because it was the only patch of cement we saw in about 20, 30 miles stretch. And there was a tire track through it,” said Garcia.
Detective Doug Ridenour, spokesman for the Modesto Police Department, said he could not comment about any aspect of the investigation. He said he became aware that Bill Garcia was in the area through calls from reporters.
Bill Garcia has reportedly been involved in several high-profile missing persons cases in the past few years.
In January, Garcia found Philip Salcedo Jr., an armored car driver accused of stealing $3 million from his company and fleeing to Mexico. Did he find the money as well?
On March 5, 2003, the Modesto Bee reported the following:
Garcia said he has spoken to the families of Scott and Laci Peterson but neither has hired him. Instead, he's in the area to see if he can make a dent in the case.
"We are here because we are just nosy people," Garcia said.
Of course, he added, he's also a businessman. If his investigation does help solve the missing case, he said he would be interested in some type of compensation.
"We are here for the long haul," Garcia said. "But it will all be based on our finances and how quickly we can cover these areas."
Garcia is clearly a hired gun. He is not an investigator. The claim that a private investigator from San Diego discovered a chunk of cement that might help police in their search for missing Modesto woman, Laci Peterson, is a hoax and a farce, but it made the papers.
The focus on "Private Investigators" like Garcia and on Scott's boat is a deliberate and ultimately obscene rejection of some very sound advice offered to police, by Jonna M. Spilbor, a frequent guest commentator on Court-TV and other television news networks, where she has covered many of the nation's high-profile criminal trials. A graduate of Thomas Jefferson School of Law, Jonna has also served in the San Diego City Attorney's Office, Criminal Division, and the Office of the United States Attorney in the Drug Task Force and Appellate units, and she is clearly not an easy person to discredit. In her own words, Jonna said:
Just last week, Modesto police were criticized for ignoring a call from what could turn out to be a critical witness. A neighbor living ten blocks from the Peterson home, called police within a week of Laci Peterson's disappearance to report seeing her the very morning she went missing - a full forty-five minutes after Scott Peterson left to go fishing.
Police have yet to speak to the witness, claiming they haven't had time to return the more than 8,000 phone tips they've received on the case. They have had time, mind you, to keep a close eye on Scott Peterson despite his continued protestations of innocence.
Maybe the most important piece of evidence the police have overlooked is the family dog Laci was walking when she disappeared. Although Laci never returned home from that walk, the dog did. Which means the pooch didn't get too far before his owner went missing. My advice to the Modesto police? Stop looking in the ponds, puddles and potholes, and start knocking on the neighbors' doors.
The police are rejecting intelligent people like Jonna Spilbor and are relying on quacks like Bill Garcia, and his associate, Wayne, who prefers not to be photographed because of his undercover work. These so called. "independent" fools are seeking to implicate Scott in Laci's murder because, according to the press release that Garcia issued to reporters, "It is our belief that Mrs. Rocha-Peterson did not leave of her own accord and was the victim of abduction. At this time our firm believes that Mr. Scott Peterson has not been forthright with the Rocha family or authorities and may be involved in his wife's disappearance."
Laci has indeed been abducted, an undercover operation is trying to create the false impression that Scott Peterson murdered his wife and the only mystery here is the following question: Who is using Garcia for the sake of covering up the truth about the disappearance of Laci Peterson?
A quack like Bill Garcia cannot be taken seriously when it comes to exposing the truth about the disappearance of Laci Peterson because he is not a competent investigator. John Philpin exposed the the prerequisite of a competent investigator when he said, "a thorough and effective investigation does not begin with suspects, nor does it begin with theories of motive or motivation. Initially, the best investigators focus on the evidence." John Philpin, one of the first independent criminal profilers in the United States, is a retired forensic psychologist with an international reputation as an expert on violent behavior, he is not a quack like Bill Garcia.
There is a very high demand for quacks like Bill Garcia because the relentless obsession to arrest Scott Peterson is absolutely fierce. On March 3, 2003, KTVU's Ted Rowlands reported that sources close to the case have told him, "it's not a matter of if, but 'when' an arrest will come in the more than two-month-long investigation. Ted Rowlands and his secret sources are constantly deferring the date of Scott Peterson's arrest.
Rowlands was also told that a reported sighting by neighbor Vivian Mitchell was taken seriously when first reported early in the investigation, but that the report has been ruled out.
Apparently, there were two other pregnant women walking their dogs in the same vicinity that morning and police believe Mitchell saw one of them.
Vivian and Bill Mitchell told The Bee they saw Laci Peterson at about 10 a.m. or 10:15 a.m. on Dec. 24, wearing white and black clothes and walking with a golden retriever.
"I had seen Laci walk by the house several times before," said Vivian Mitchell. "When she walked by on Christmas Eve, I hollered to Bill, Oh look, it's the lady with the golden retriever."
Bill Mitchell, who served three terms on the Modesto City Council, said he saw them go around the corner as he went to the window.
"It looked like the dog wanted to go one way, and she was going another," he told The Bee. Vivian Mitchell said she reported the sighting to Modesto Police about a week after Laci Peterson disappeared, but never heard back.
The Mitchell sighting was dismissed because police claim that Mrs. Mitchell saw another pregnant woman walking her dog and not Laci Peterson. But If you read the Modesto Bee link from 12/30/02, it says that officials located people who saw Laci in the Park at 10:00 a.m. and it is reasonable to assume that these sightings enabled the authorities to provide a description of what Laci was wearing when she disappeared. The most disturbing fact about a possible kidnapping was provided by a police officer who interviewing people along the park's Peggy Mensinger Trail and reported that he spoke with a woman who said she heard screams on Christmas Eve at about 10:15 a.m. [modbee.com, December 27, 2002] Did the police ask the other two pregnant women who were allegedly walking their dogs at the same time as Laci was, whether they heard anybody scream or did they consider the possibility that one of the ways to make a potential kidnap victim like Laci vanish without a trace was to drive her to Longview, Washington, or to some other location where nobody was looking for Laci? The initial excuse for failing to investigate Mrs. Mitchell's claim was that Police did not have time to return the more than 8,000 phone tips they've received on the case.
The effort to dismiss Laci sightings is exceedingly fickle. Candace DeLong, a former profiler for the FBI, said she doubted the report that Laci was spotted in Longview Washington.
"Either this clerk is confused or it didn't happen at all," Delong said. "First of all, she said the woman gave her a check and said just fill in the amount. According to police reports, Laci Peterson's purse and checkbook were left at the house. There may have been a pregnant woman who said I'm being abducted, but I don't think it was Laci Peterson." [KTVU.COM, January 31, 2003]
You can detect the extreme obsession to discredit a valid report when a sighting is attributed to another pregnant woman.
If it was another pregnant woman, as Candace DeLong suggests, we would have heard about it by now, and this nauseating pattern of dismissing every Laci sighting by claiming that it was another pregnant woman is disgusting. In the final analysis, Candace DeLong's obsession to claim that a pregnant woman's appeal for help was bogus, is absolutely irresponsible, and Laci Peterson paid the ultimate price for this extreme negligence.
Candace DeLong does not dispute the fact that a pregnant woman told the clerk, in Longview Washington that she had been abducted, because the Laci sighting in Longview, Washington, was not a bogus claim.
The clerk was far too detailed and specific, to grant a quack like Candace DeLong the opportunity to obstruct justice.
The clerk told police that a pregnant woman came into the Market Place and said: "This is serious. I was kidnapped. Call the authorities when I leave."
After the man stepped out of line to get something he forgot, the clerk remarked to the woman that she should be wearing a coat on such a chilly day. The woman told the clerk she didn't have time to take a coat because she was kidnapped. She also told the clerk that the man had a weapon.
When the man returned, he asked what the two talked about while he was gone, the police report says. "She said you kidnapped her," the clerk said. The clerk said the statement seemed to make the man angry, and Laci teasingly added that her husband always kidnapped her to take her to dinner. The man relaxed and laughed.
"Yeah, I guess I kidnapped her," she recalled him saying.
The failure or reluctance to produce a surveillance tape to backup the clerk's story is used to discredit Laci sightings, but another, independent woman confirmed the clerk's story. Longview Police Chief Bob Burgreen said that he would reinterview the two women, and needless to say, if there was any reason to believe that both women were mistaken, Candace Delong would have brought it to everybody's attention.
Despite the refusal to acknowledge Laci sightings, Laci's dog made it back to the Peterson house by 10:30 am. on the day that Laci was kidnapped, and that had absolutely nothing to do with any other pregnant women, despite the nonsense that Candace DeLong promotes. Surveillance tapes can be erased or destroyed but contemporaneous press reports cannot possibly vanish without a trace."Neighbors have told police they saw Laci -- dressed in a white shirt and black pants -- walking her dog in the park around 10 a.m. Karen Servas, a neighbor, said she spotted the Petersons' golden retriever about 10:30 a.m. The dog was wearing its leash, which was muddy. Servas said she returned the dog to its yard, not realizing there might be something amiss." The police cannot even discredit Scott Peterson, let alone, all the neighbors who clearly understand the fact that Christmas eve is too special to confuse with any other day of the year, and if the neighbors say they saw Laci on Christmas Eve, it is certainly a very credible claim.
Candace DeLong is a 20 year veteran of the FBI and it is not appropriate for this former Special Agent to inist that Scott Peterson murdered his own wife and to thereby destroy the opportunity to investigate credible sightings of Laci Peterson. Clearly, the only thing that has denied the opportunity to conduct a complete and thorough investigation is the fraudulent claim that Scott Peterson murdered his own wife, and that is not acceptable. The FBI may think it can avoid accountability in this matter because Candace DeLong is a former agent, but it can't. There is no excuse for the obstruction of justice that Candace DeLong has engaged and she should be held accountable.
Candace DeLong has successfully brainwashed Laci's mother to the point where she parrots her suspicions, but competent investigators assess credibility, they do not manipulate grieving families. The testimony of witnesses like the Mitchells appears to be spontaneous and unrehearsed, but the claims of witnesses like Amber Frey and her father Ron, are bizarre and mysterious. Scott Peterson claims he had an inappropriate sexual relationship with Amber Frey and apologizes for the grief he has caused. The Freys never fail to send mixed signals that raise more questions than provide answers. On the one hand, Amber's dad, Ron Frey suggests that he shuns publicity because he refuses to sell a photograph of Scott Peterson and his daughter [according to Ted Rowlands, the National Enquirer offered the Freys more than $100,000 for the photograph.] On the other hand, Ron Frey sits down with Ted Rowlands and publicizes a complete description of the picture he refuses to sell. Most normal people would simply sell the picture of Scott Peterson and Amber Frey. Who would rather sit down with a reliable, "police spin" ally like Ted Rowlands and publicize a precise description of a photograph allegedly in his possession? Needless to say, if Ron Frey thinks that it is more important to feed Ted Rowlands of KTVU than it is to make a hundred thousand dollars, there is something very peculiar about his values. It has been reported that KTVU, the San Francisco Bay area's Fox affiliate does absolutely nothing beyond dutifully report police spin, and that has evidently turned Ted Rowlands into absolutely nothing beyond a mouthpiece of the relentless zeal to create the impression that Scott Peterson murdered his wife. Under the circumstances, selling a story to the National Enquirer is far more honorable than pretending that Ted Rowlands reports the news.
Incidentally, the police also used photographs to divide the Rochas and the Petersons. Is there some reason why the rest of us are being denied the opportunity to see these photographs? One would think that if they were really that incriminating, they would have been posted on KTVU's website, next to the link of the National Enquirer report about the claim that Scott Peterson murdered Laci on December 23, 2002, even though the neighbors saw Laci walking her dog, the very next day.
The truth about the relationship between Amber Frey and Scott Peterson is extremely obscure. Did Amber Frey really have to call the Police to tell them that she had a "romantic relationship" with Scott? According to the well publicized account, "one month after a pregnant Modesto woman vanished, a tearful 28-year-old woman stepped forward to admit that she had carried on an affair with the missing woman's husband." According to Scott Peterson, he told the police that he was having an affair on December 24, 2002. Who is telling the truth? Is it unreasonable to believe that on December 24, 2002, Scott Peterson, who was in a state of panic over the disappearance of his wife, told the police about his affair because he was too preoccupied with the obsession to find Laci, to worry about what the police thought? After all, Scott Peterson repeatedly made claims like "I don't care what you think about me as long as Laci remains the focus" and it appears to be in character for Scott Peterson to have told somebody about the affair, not because he was proud of it, but because he did not care about what anybody thought about him personally.
Scott Peterson is indeed very credible because he has always been consistent. The Freys have revised their allegations. Frey, it was initially reported, notified Modesto police of the affair when she discovered Scott Peterson was Laci Peterson's husband. Amber, it was repeatedly reported, had thought that Scott Peterson was single. Now, we are supposed to believe that Amber knew that Scott was married, but he had told her that his wife was dead. Now isn't that a bizarre revision?
On March 11, 2003, KTVU, promoted the claim that Ron Frey said that Scott Peterson lured Amber Frey into an affair by saying he had "lost" his wife the previous year.
Ron Frey said the last few months had been devastating for his daughter. He said among the disturbing things Scott had told Amber while he was courting her was that he had been married but had "lost" his wife in 2001. "He had implied that he had lost her a year ago," Frey said. "He didn't say how he had lost her or what it was (she died of) ... She (Amber) took that to mean she had passed away."
This desperate, carefully worded effort to create the false impression that Scott Peterson murdered his own wife is fascinating. It almost makes the "cement in the boat" theory sound credible.
Scott Peterson is a perfect gentleman with a common flaw. The obsession to create the impression that he murdered his own wife is a a grotesque joke and the fact that Ted Rowlands and KTVU routinely promote police spin raises serious questions about the level of corruption which surrounds the plot to cover up the truth about Laci Peterson's disappearance.
Amber Frey's father certainly changed his tune since he said that his daughter thought that Scott Peterson was single. "He not only fooled her, but he fooled the nation for a month," Why is Ron Frey acting like Scott Peterson is President Bill Clinton, a man who lied about sex and provoked a national crisis? Scott Peterson is a perfect gentleman with a common flaw, he is not the President of the United States.
There is no room for suggesting that the Freys are not deliberate liars. On January 26, 2003, Ron Frey, who was quoted in the
Fresno Bee was very specific. "She really thought he was a truly fine person," Frey said. "She had no clue in the world that he was married. She was proud to be with him." Clearly, if Frey did not know that Scott was married, she cannot credibly claim that he told her that he was a widower.
The investigation into the disappearance of Laci Peterson has been an absolute fiasco. Incompetence reflects benign negligence or it can reflect malignant corruption when it is too extreme and too deliberate, to casually dismiss. To be brief, a fishing expedition is not necessarily corrupt, but the conspiratorial parallel of a predictable fishing expedition is the "mastermind" criminal who stages a suicide, to cover up a murder.
No need to waste any more time documenting the extreme incompetence that is responsible for the exclusive focus on Scott Peterson. Suffice it to say that it is time to clear Laci's husband because the well publicized myth that Scott Peterson is still a free man because he has not cooperated with the police is astoundingly ignorant. First and foremost, Scott Peterson has fully cooperate with the police because he has told them everything he knows about the disappearance of Laci Peterson, and even Laci's neighbors confirm the fact that Scott Peterson is telling the truth. More importantly, if the police rely upon the cooperation of an alleged, mastermind criminal like Scott Peterson to solve a murder, they are too hopelessly incompetent to take seriously.
To be fair to the police, they are facing a monumental challenge because it is very difficult to determine a conceivable motivation to account for the disappearance of Laci Peterson. The following message board post reflects the range of speculation:
The modus operandi of the people who murdered Chandra Levy and the people who are responsible for the disappearance of Laci Peterson is exactly the same. In both cases, the women vanished without a trace and in both cases, innocent men were aggressively vilified, not because they were guilty of murder but because they were victims of an unwarranted, intrusive investigation into their private sex lives. In both cases, the women were not victims of robbery, but victims of being abducted without wallet or purse. In other words, they were victims of professional murderers.
Needless to say, the breadth of the human imagination is boundless, but if somebody like Dominick Dunne can use his celebrity status in a fickle effort to prove that Gary Condit murdered Chandra Levy, why can't somebody like Ted Rowlands pin the disappearance of Laci Peterson on Scott? -isn't that the logical follow-up, different targets, same scam?
It is not possible to officially link one murder to another until at least one of them is solved, and that is not even remotely plausible as long as the wrong people are targeted. When the media portrays Scott Peterson as a man who is guilty of murdering his wife, the fix is in, even before the crime is investigated. An allegation is nothing more and nothing less than a fickle guess, until all options and all possibilities are carefully scrutinized.
Story last updated Sunday, March 16, 2003 - 9:59 PM