Thursday, November 29, 2007

Petersons in the News

I've had a nagging feeling for some time regarding Scott and Laci Peterson, even to the point, I Google Searched his attorney's name. I've done nothing more, but the nagging feeling won't go away, especially with the new headlines containing the name Peterson.
First, we "allegedly" have the teacher that ran away with her student while leaving her own child here in the states. I guess the word "alleged" is required before a deal or a trial occurs. Anyway, the reports of this alleged incident seem crazy. What in the world was she thinking? What about her child? And what in the world does someone in their mid-twenties think they have in common with a 13 year old? He called her his "baby gurl" and she was a teacher, twice his age! That has always made me crazy. The entire, immature, misspelled mess. Okay, that being said, let's get down to the other two Peterson's in the news.
This former Sgt. Drew Peterson evokes a much different emotion in me than Scott did a few years ago, as I read the investigation reports. Drew Peterson was getting a divorce in 2004 from the now deceased Kathy Savio. Drew Peterson began dating Stacy when she was 17, she is now 23. So, let's start with a bit of basic math. Sgt. Peterson, a man sworn to uphold the law,
was dating a teen-ager while still married. The wife has a bizarre "accidental drowning" in an empty bathtub, that leaves her corpse bruised and bloody, right before the divorce settlement and it's ruled an accident? I think several things need to be investigated there, including whomever performed the autopsy. And obviously, there is reason to wonder if Stacy is even alive, or we would not have all the rest of these details and Sgt. Peterson's resignation. Yet, he's still free and making statements. I realize in this country we are presumed innocent until proven guilty, but there has to be a piece of evidence that hasn't been connected publicly. Exhuming a body doesn't usually happen on the presumption of innocence. I know there are two very small children involved and I have no idea what they might know, but according to the dispatcher that received a call from Sgt. Peterson that evening, he already knew his wife was "missing" before he was to go work at 5pm. Her family reported her missing the following morning. When asked if she took anything with her, he mentioned cash, her passport, and a bikini. I don't know about you, but I wouldn't have thought to look for a swimming suit in October, if I were looking for clues for a missing person. But then, I'm not a trained professional. It would take me awhile to tell you what was missing in the way of clothing. I don't know if I could find my own swimming suit in the first place I looked. So, if we can ascertain anything here, we know that Drew Peterson was dating a teen-age girl while married. We also know that his wife at that time met with an untimely passing, and we know that he has two small children whose births must fit into the time frame between his 3rd wife's death and the present. I've been wondering if Stacy knew something about Kathy's questionable death, and today I read that she had gone to a clergyman about this very matter, just a couple of months before she disappeared. Since her disappearance, Drew has received an "anonymous letter," been on TV, made statements, and resigned. Does he look guilty? Well he's presumed innocent until proven otherwise. Even his step-brother has raised some concern, but Drew has done his best to discredit him. I guess witnesses don't have to be presumed truthful until proven otherwise, or are simply all dead.
Now, back a few years to Scott and Laci Peterson. I remember awakening to the news. The morning after she didn't return home Laci's absence was national news. I remember telling my husband then, that seemed odd. An adult woman that didn't come home one evening was national news as a missing person, the next day? I'd always heard, unless it was a child, you had to wait 48 hours to file a missing persons report. I didn't buy it then and I don't buy it now. I've had a couple of theories, but I'll not make a point of those, I'm just raising questions. Undoubtedly, Scott Peterson ran his mouth and ran around way too much. I remember there was a Monday night movie before he even went to trial. This case was huge! And remember Laci's mom ended up at the White House watching President Bush sign the bill into law about prosecuting for murder in the case of an unborn child. But back to the case as it built. As evidence to Scott's affairs continued to emerge, the notion that he was a cad was gaining momentum and as the massage therapist, Amber, gained notoriety, the mystery took on a life of it's own. The case lingered without clues or evidence, just gossip and speculation for more than three months. Then, suddenly in less than a week, a baby's corpse was found, a woman's body was found, DNA verified, and Scott was up on double murder charges.
On a sidenote regarding DNA, I just checked a FOXNews report about the little girl that was found "Baby Grace" and with her DNA and the father's DNA, Texas expects the results back in 2 weeks and will not verify for certain they have identified the little girl, but they are reasonably sure.
Yet, in the Peterson case, after months under water, and frankly, as a former funeral director, I'm surprised there were bodies at all, considering the aquatic life, the DNA test was conclusive between finding the bodies on the 13th and 14th and Scott's arrest on the 18th. As to the rest of the story . . . He was proven an unfaithful cad, he was proven to be in financial distress, but he was sentenced to death on nothing but circumstantial evidence. There was no evidence at all, and no witnesses with any clue, actually linking him to the death of Laci. I watched as the events unfolded and it just seemed like a really bad Lifetime Channel Movie.
Anyone causing the death of another is himself to be put to death on the word of witnesses: but the word of one witness is not enough. Torah of Holy Scripture

1 comment:

A Voice of Sanity said...

Consider:
• A visibly pregnant woman vanishes from her home. No signs of a crime can be found - anywhere - ever.
• Her body turns up four months later, found on the shore of San Francisco Bay, a place where many other bodies have been dumped.
• Her uterus has been cut open by someone unskilled in medical procedures.
• The fetus and the placenta are both missing.
• Some distance away, the body of her child is also found.
• He shows no signs of prematurity, he is full term and he is not curled up in the fetal position.
• The fetal cord has been crudely cut.
• A piece of twine has been double knotted around his neck, not to harm him but to keep his body wrapped in plastic bags to protect it. One of the bags is found nearby.
• The mother is wearing underwear with a wear pattern which shows she has worn it for the whole period of her abduction - 111 days.
• Her clothes are still on her body, something which could not happen unless they were retied after the baby was removed. It also shows she was in the water for a day or two at most.
• Her uterus is two to three weeks post partum, showing that she lived at least that long after the baby was removed from her body.
• Although the body of the mother is simply discarded in the sea, either from the Albany Bulb or more likely from Point Isabel (it has been suggested in the Hoffman channel), the body of the baby is carefully laid on the shore at Point Isabel so it can be found and buried. This is clearly the work of someone who cared for the baby.

What part of this does NOT look like a failed fetus napping, where both mother and child have died?

Blog Archive