Laci Peterson - Interesting Timing? I Have Questions

[theory]

LACI PETERSON - INTERESTING TIMING? I HAVE QUESTIONS

Posted By: Rayelan
Date: Saturday, 19 April 2003, 12:55 a.m.

Today, as I watched the Modesto press conference, I became filled with anger that her husband could have been such a monster to have murdered his pregnant wife, cut off her head and legs, and then wrapped up her body and his baby and threw them in the San Francisco Bay.

I had already tried and convicted her louse of a husband and had him sitting on death row!

Then my husband said, "Don't you think it is funny that they keep referring to that baby as a full term fetus?"

I said something to the effect that it was almost full term.

Then he said, "Don't you think it is strange that she was supposedly killed seven and a half months pregnant and then they find a full term fetus... like it had to have been born before it was killed?"

I answered that the baby probably worked its way out of her body due to the tides or something like that. And I didn't think anymore about it until a friend called.

He said, "Why did the Attorney General of California get involved in the press conference?"

I replied, "He probably wants to get his name known so when he runs against Davis in the recall people will know who he is."

My friend replied, "I think there's more going on here. I think someone wants to knock something out of the headlines and we are going to have another OJ Simpson trial."

Since this friend happens to be the same one who called me at 5:00AM on the morning that Nicole was murdered, I began to wonder if he knew something that I didn't know. He is the one who told me that Nicole and Ron were killed by a team of government assassins. I never really knew the reason, but I think it may be for the same reason Laci was murdered... to keep the public in the dark for a few years.

Does anyone remember anything that happened in the world during those two years that OJ was on television everyday?

I began to see what my friend meant when he wondered out loud if we were going to have another few years of OJ-like distraction.

And who is orchestrating the distraction.

Shortly after Laci disappeared, I wrote a short comment about the fact that her husband attended San Luis Obispo University at the same time that a string of coeds disappeared. Their bodies were never found.

I have friends in the SLO area who claim that the coeds were victims of a satanic cult. They were sacrificed and then their bodies were burned. My friends took authorities to the site where the bodies were burned, and showed them the charred bones. But the authorities refused to investigate. Why? According to my friends, it is because the local authorities are either being blackmailed by the satanists, or are part of them.

At that time, I feared that Laci may have been kidnapped by satanists and was being held captive until the birth of her son, who would then be sacrificed on some high holy day for satanists.

For some reason, Modesto seems to lie in an area of strange phenomena. Merced is about half an hour by car from Modesto, and Merced is really the hub of bizarre murders. There have been at least 7 people killed in strange ways. Killed by a naked man with a pitchfork. Beheaded by a naked man. More beheadings of three tourists at Yosemite, and then another beheading.

And yes, Laci Peterson was beheaded!

What kind a place is the Modesto area?

When I grew up there it was small town America. A place where everyone knew everyone and everyone looked out for everyone! It was American Graffitti. George Lucas patterned his first major film about the typical high school days in Modesto. He grew up there also. It was fun, it was innocent, it was the perfect place to raise a family.

In many ways, it hasn't changed that much. Even though it is ten times the size it was when I lived near there, it still has the home town feel. People still know their neighbors and still care about them.

But there is another side of the Central Valley. I don't know when it started but there is a sick and sinister side to the valley that can be seen by the bizarre streak of murders that have gone on in that area.

Here are the links to two of the articles I have written about these murders:

MORE BIZARRE MERCED MURDERS
http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/archive.cgi?read=18439

SATANIC CULTS -- PEDOPHILIA AND MIND CONTROL
http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/archive.cgi?read=4408

When Laci first went missing the first thoughts that I had was she had been kidnapped by another tripped out satanist or by an equally bizarre mind controlled zombie.

In the one article, I talk about government mind control projects that are connected to pedophilia and satanism.

And now let me finish the phone call I had with my friend.

I asked him, "Do you mean you think she might have been killed and her body stored somewhere so it could be tossed in the bay to cover something that was in the news?"

I can't remember exactly what he said, but it was something to the effect of, "They did it with OJ, why can't they do it with this woman?"

I began running the scenario through my mind. Some mind controlled freak is triggered to snatch Laci. The person could have been a satanist. Laci and the baby could have been part of a satanic ritual. The kidnapper was told to keep the bodies until told when and where to dump them.

The papers have been filled with stories of Scott Peterson going to the Berkeley marina to fish that day. If someone else killed Laci, they would know exactly where to dump her body to make it appear as if Scott did it.

And now to the timing!

What happened in Iraq today? Did the US forces get wiped out? Did they install a new Iraqi government based on democracy? I don't know. Everytime I listened to the news all I heard was about Laci Peterson. I guess I will have to take the time to read the foreign newspapers on the internet in order to find out what happened today in the world.

I wonder how many people take the time to get on the internet and research what happened around the world. When OJ was in the headlines everyday, I didn't have a computer that could get on the internet. I wonder how many of you did. I wonder how many people had any idea what was going on in the nation, let alone the world.

It worked well for the Clintons. No one has any idea what they did during their first three years. I can't help but wonder if the Bush's have stolen a page from the Clinton play book and plan to keep America busy with the demonization of Scott Peterson... at least long enough for George W. to be re-elected.

But just as I am telling another friend my theory, she said... "What if it WASN"T the Bushes who did it. What if the liberals are so scared at how well the war in Iraq is going that they have concocted something that will steal the headlines from anything good that Bush could do."

I wanted to dismiss her comment, but then remembered reading some article about the fear that is streaking through Hollywood right now. "The Hollywood elite have not been so scared since the McCarthy days," the article claimed. It went on to say that the liberals haven't been so scared of losing everything in their lives.

In this world of right is left and up is down and war is good and peace is war, logic doesn't stand a chance. I don't know who killed Laci. I don't know if her murder is going to be used to distract the American public. What I do know, is something doesn't smell right about this case.

Let's see how much of the headlines the Laci Peterson story grabs in the next year. If it becomes another OJ, then my fears will be accurate. She was killed and placed in storage to be pulled out and used to keep something out of the headlines.

What is it that they don't want us to know? We have a whole bunch of things that they could be trying to cover up:

Iraq

Planet X

The Pole Shift

SARS

The 2004 election

What else could they want to hide from us??

[cpud]

this is absurd. the man charged was 3 miles from where the bodies were found at the time of the murders, and he had already sold his wifes truck, dyed his hair, and grew a beard.

He was also having an affair with their marriage counselor.

But you can just blame this on George W Bush, as you seem to do for most problems in this country.

[theory]

innocent until proven guilty, by my observations the media has already tried and convicted what bullshit.

[Janus]

Originally posted by theory
innocent until proven guilty, by my observations the media has already tried and convicted what bullshit.

very true on both accounts...

i find it especially clever how the media is using the baby's name, "conner peterson"

[Pureform]

if her husband is innocent then it was probably some psycho that kidnapped her while she was walking the dog. the killer heard that the husband had been fishing so he dumped the body there to frame him.:confused

[cpud]

Originally posted by theory
innocent until proven guilty, by my observations the media has already tried and convicted what bullshit.

the media has given me some facts: that he has dyed hair, recently went to mexico, traded in his late wife's vehicle to purchase a new one of his own, and the $10,000 in cash that was in the car when he was picked up.

This is extremely odd behavior for someone who just lost a wife and an unborn son.

[Miss Jag]

Originally posted by cpud
the media has given me some facts: that he has dyed hair, recently went to mexico, traded in his late wife's vehicle to purchase a new one of his own, and the $10,000 in cash that was in the car when he was picked up.

This is extremely odd behavior for someone who just lost a wife and an unborn son.

No shit. I agree completely. And I have to say I wouldn't be surprised if his mistress was in on it somehow--if not completely responsible for her actual murder.

I also heard that he tried to sell the house--another rumor floating around out there. I haven't tried to confirm it yet...someone else have any info?

As for the bit with the media using the child's name--it has been my observation that the majority of the obstetrical patients at the practice for which I work have their childrens' names not only picked out, but actively use them when they are speaking of the unborn. Chances are pretty good that Laci and her family also referred to the child by name--especially since she was in her 8th month which would put her at 34 to 36 weeks (40 weeks is considered full-term) and they could have truly expected the child at any time by then--she could have easily gone into pre-term labor, which is fairly common. That's not really a "media tactic" then, by definition. It would, however, be considered a "social norm".

[Janus]

Originally posted by Miss Jag

As for the bit with the media using the child's name--it has been my observation that the majority of the obstetrical patients at the practice for which I work have their childrens' names not only picked out, but actively use them when they are speaking of the unborn. Chances are pretty good that Laci and her family also referred to the child by name--especially since she was in her 8th month which would put her at 34 to 36 weeks (40 weeks is considered full-term) and they could have truly expected the child at any time by then--she could have easily gone into pre-term labor, which is fairly common. That's not really a "media tactic" then, by definition. It would, however, be considered a "social norm".

I said it was clever to use the baby's name, only because it increases the father's guilty image....

In court, neither the prosecution, nor the defense will be able to refer to the child as conner peterson...

[Miss Jag]

Originally posted by Janus
I said it was clever to use the baby's name, only because it increases the father's guilty image....

In court, neither the prosecution, nor the defense will be able to refer to the child as conner peterson...

I hate to show you up, but according to California law, YES, they can use the child's name--there is no law prohibiting it, and YES, he can be convicted of a double homicide:

CALIFORNIA CODES
PENAL CODE
SECTION 187-199

187.
(a) Murder is the unlawful killing of a human being, or a fetus, with malice aforethought.

(b) This section shall not apply to any person who commits an act that results in the death of a fetus if any of the following apply:
(1) The act complied with the Therapeutic Abortion Act, Article 2 (commencing with Section 123400) of Chapter 2 of Part 2 of Division 106 of the Health and Safety Code.
(2) The act was committed by a holder of a physician's and surgeon's certificate, as defined in the Business and Professions Code, in a case where, to a medical certainty, the result of childbirth would be death of the mother of the fetus or where her death from childbirth, although not medically certain, would be substantially certain or more likely than not.
(3) The act was solicited, aided, abetted, or consented to by the mother of the fetus.

(c) Subdivision (b) shall not be construed to prohibit the
prosecution of any person under any other provision of law.

And then you have special circumstances with which he can be tried as listed in section 190.2, subdivision (a) paragraph (3) which clearly states:

The defendant, in this proceeding, has been convicted of more
than one offense of murder in the first or second degree.

Read it for yourself:
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/waisgate?WAISdocID=05285622249+2+0+0&WAISaction=retrieve

[Janus]

Originally posted by Miss Jag
I hate to show you up, but according to California law, YES, they can use the child's name--there is no law prohibiting it.

The section of the penal code you just posted makes the distinction between a human being and a fetus... the fact the california law does allow for the prosecution of the murder of an unborn fetus begs the question.

btw, the link for the full code dosen't work.

Originally posted by Miss Jag

and YES, he can be convicted of a double homicide:

Yes this is true...
I'd like to reiterate that my intention was not to argue the prosecutability of peterson's actions... i just commented on the media's use of the baby's name... ;)

For example... in the court room it might go down like this...

Prosecutor: "We have concrete evidence to prove that mr. perterson killed both his wife (her name) and their son, conner peterson"

Defense (if he/she is smart): "Objection your honor, there is no record of any conner peterson"

Might seem calloused, but that's the way the law operates...

[Miss Jag]

Originally posted by Janus
The section of the penal code you just posted makes the distinction between a human being and a fetus... the fact the california law does allow for the prosecution of the murder of an unborn fetus begs the question.

The part about the fetus was added after a case where a man attacked a pregnant woman and told her that he was going to "stomp fucking the baby out" [of her]. That's why it actually says "malice aforethought". And that's why they follow it up with exceptions to allow abortion.


btw, the link for the full code dosen't work.

Bastards. You can go to http://www.leginfo.ca.gov, select "California", check the "all" box and type "homicide" into the search box and search. Then select "Penal Code 187-199". It'll be there.


Yes this is true...
I'd like to reiterate that my intention was not to argue the prosecutability of peterson's actions... i just commented on the media's use of the baby's name... ;)

I'm not trying to put words in your mouth (and I definitely don't mean any disrespect), but I was under the impression by your first remark that because the media was using the baby's name that it was nothing more than a "tactic" to make Peterson look more guilty, or to at least bring more bias against him in the media. Either way, I was just trying to prove a point that it's more normal for people to address their VERY soon to be born children by name than not and for the people around them to also address the expected as such...and at this point, being that the child is dead, I hardly think that the media can go around saying "Laci Peterson and her baby". The parents had settled on a name prior to the deaths and I'm sure their family and friends were in on the child's name.

On a personal level, I think it's only right to give the child a little dignity in calling him by name. It wasn't as though he didn't exist just because he hadn't yet been born.


For example... in the court room it might go down like this...

Prosecutor: "We have concrete evidence to prove that mr. perterson killed both his wife (her name) and their son, conner peterson"

Defense (if he/she is smart): "Objection your honor, there is no record of any conner peterson"

Might seem calloused, but that's the way the law operates...

And the prosecution would then argue that Connor Peterson most certainly existed and that records of his existance could certainly be brought into evidence by simply subpoenaing Laci's obstetrical record charting not only Connor's existance but his growth up until Laci disappeared--by that time she would have been going to the doc at least every week, if not every two weeks, and the average number of visits for a pregnant woman would number 16 over the course of her term (Laci would have had at least 9 to 10 routine visits, not including any problems) --not to mention the PHYSICAL evidence of the body of the child.

Furthermore, the child could have been born at the time of her disappearance and survived quite well outside of the womb prematurely at 32 to 34 weeks. He would have been small--probably about 4 to 5 lbs, but he was fully developed at that point, another fact that can be brought into evidence.

I love to argue too much; I should have been a lawyer.

[Janus]

Originally posted by Miss Jag

I love to argue too much; I should have been a lawyer.

It's not too late

Originally posted by Miss Jag

And the prosecution would then argue that Connor Peterson most certainly existed and that records of his existance could certainly be brought into evidence by simply subpoenaing Laci's obstetrical record charting not only Connor's existance but his growth up until Laci disappeared--by that time she would have been going to the doc at least every week, if not every two weeks, and the average number of visits for a pregnant woman would number 16 over the course of her term (Laci would have had at least 9 to 10 routine visits, not including any problems) --not to mention the PHYSICAL evidence of the body of the child.

Furthermore, the child could have been born at the time of her disappearance and survived quite well outside of the womb prematurely at 32 to 34 weeks. He would have been small--probably about 4 to 5 lbs, but he was fully developed at that point, another fact that can be brought into evidence.

Right on, I agree...
The ability of the state of california to prosecute for murders of unborn children is predicated on the notion that they do infact "exist"... I don't dispute this.
But their names, regardless of what the family has planned, are not a matter of public record, nor are they provable facts...

If forensics determines that the child had infact been delivered, i suppose the point becomes moot. Though this disscussion really has no bearing on the fate of the alleged killer, as the charges won't change.

[Miss Jag]

Originally posted by Janus
It's not too late

Hahaha...:up

Originally posted by Janus
Right on, I agree...
The ability of the state of california to prosecute for murders of unborn children is predicated on the notion that they do infact "exist"... I don't dispute this.
But their names, regardless of what the family has planned, are not a matter of public record, nor are they provable facts...


Actually, according to the CA State Health Code, yes, they can use the name, because it would be recorded on the death certificate. If Laci's family attests to the fact that the name was decided upon--and if they have video or anything proving such--like a picture from Fetal Fotos with Connor's name on it, then it would REALLY be indismissable--and if Peterson tries to go up against them, then he can be charged with a misdemeanor for attept to defraud the state over the child's name. There is a section that deals with "parentage or relative dispute" over the child and the information given in regard to the child for the death certificate.

And they have what is known as a fetal death certificate which is required for any fetus that perishes at 22 weeks of gestation or above.

Originally posted by Janus
If forensics determines that the child had infact been delivered, i suppose the point becomes moot. Though this disscussion really has no bearing on the fate of the alleged killer, as the charges won't change.

Agreed.

[theory]

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/art2/lacicharge1.gif
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/art2/lacicharge2.gif

[Janus]

Nice job cleaning that up theory...

my bad

[Miss Jag]

Well, I guess that DOES put it to rest. Gee, and I was having fun! We shall have to go around again sometime Janus. I was enjoying it. Bummer. :D

[Wes]

My friend told me Elvis kidnapped her and kept them in Micheal Jackson's basement for 3 months.Then Elvis cloned her and impregnated the clone.They then killed the clone and sunk the clone to the bottom of san fran bay.My friend also told me that laci has been surgically altered to look like both Osama Bin laden and Saddam Hussien and is currently leading a small group of arab soldiers disguised as Bob Barker look-a-likes into Baghdad to try and over throw the American and British forces.


Im not 1 to believe in conspiracy theory's,but I'm pretty sure my friend is on to something here....



:rolleyes :ganja :holy shit :kitty :domokun :lighter :rinse :king

[theory]

Harming fetus in assault on mother should be federal crime, White House says
By Associated Press, 4/25/2003 17:50
WASHINGTON (AP) The White House urged Congress on Friday to pass a law making it a federal crime to harm a fetus during an assault on its mother, a subject currently in the news in connection with a California murder case.

The House passed legislation in 2001 supported by President Bush that would make it a criminal offense to injure or kill a fetus during the commission of a violent crime. The Senate never took up the measure.

Bush press secretary Ari Fleischer declined to comment specifically on the California case in which Scott Peterson has been charged with murdering his wife, Laci, and their unborn child.

But asked whether it is appropriate for the husband to be charged with two murders, Fleischer responded that the president believes that ''when an unborn child is injured or killed during the commission of a crime of violence, the law should recognize what most people immediately recognize, and that is that such a crime has two victims.''

Peterson pleaded innocent on Monday. Laci Peterson, who was eight months pregnant, disappeared on Christmas Eve, and the bodies washed ashore last week in San Francisco Bay, three miles from where Scott Peterson had said he was fishing.

California law permits a murder charge for a fetus if a pregnant woman is slain.

''The president calls on the House and calls on the Senate to again pass the Unborn Victims of Violence Act,'' Fleischer said

[Miss Jag]

I think it should come to pass.

[cpud]

unless you beat up pregnant women, you should be in favor of this.