Laci Peterson

I really haven't followed this whole murder/trial from the begining, I know alot of people have.

I just find it amazingly curious how when the defense finally gets their opportunity to question the girlfriend, "There's been a potential development in this case." At the request from the defense attorney:

www.courttv.com...


I wonder if they located some info on Frey in regards to her other relationships.

I read somewhere after her married ex- boyfriend's wife gave birth, she went to the hospital to look at the baby.

Why would Frey do that? Isn't that kinda ballsy?

(If I can locate the source of that article, I'll edit/post it here).

Hmmmmmmmmmm............

So what are you saying mako?

If Amber stalked her ex-boyfriend and his new wife?

She could have stalked Laci and killed her, due to

jealousy and extreme obsession for Scott?

It seems there could be a pattern here.........

Who knows. People do some real freaky stuff these days.

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott


I don't think Gerogos will do anything more than point out what a tramp Frey is and sit down. If he has a bombshell to drop, he better do it soon.

What does it matter whether she's a tramp or not!? She was obviously upset about him being married....her morals are not on trail, considering his morals...that would be laughable.....daaauuummm

[edit on 8/18/2004 by LadyV]

Originally posted by LadyV

What does it matter whether she's a tramp or not!?

She was obviously upset about him being married....her morals are not on trail, considering his morals...that would be laughable.....daaauuummm

Wait and see what happens. Geragos will tiptoe gingerly around Frey, because she if fragile and engenders some sympathy from certain quarters and Frey is not on trial.

But it is common practice for attorneys to call into question the character of witnesses and he will only have to ask a few questions to establish Frey's morals.

Have we asked ourselves why Amber needs an attorney?

Truly, everyone's morals are on trial everyday and our virtue is never relative to the lack of virtue of another.

Geragos, unless he wants to lose the trial, will not attack Frey viciously, but he will establish that Peterson was not her first affair with a married man.

[edit on 04/8/18 by GradyPhilpott]

www.foxnews.com...

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott

but he will establish that Peterson was not her first affair with a married man.

[edit on 04/8/18 by GradyPhilpott]

But what does that have to do with him killing his wife...what does it have to do with anything?

Originally posted by LadyV
But what does that have to do with him killing his wife...what does it have to do with anything?

It all comes down to character and her credibilty to the jury. It may not be the way things should be, but it is the way things are.

Pundits are now speculating that the new evidence which has been uncovered is going to open the door for Geragos to nail Frey as an inveterate homebreaker and maybe more.

Time will tell.

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
Pundits are now speculating that the new evidence which has been uncovered is going to open the door for Geragos to nail Frey as an inveterate homebreaker and maybe more.

I'm still confused Grady. Frey has not testified to any knowledge of a murder. The tapes contain her and Peterson's voices - there is no he said she said testimony. Why would you attempt to impeach her credibility when its irrelevant?

Frey, with the assistance of Alred, is trying to come off as an innocent victim who was victimized by Scott Peterson, the creep, murderer.

Peterson is fighting for his life, as in the event he is found guilty, he could face the death penalty.

Both sides want to win.

By showing Frey had previous relationship(s) willingly with a married man, going to the hospital and seeing the baby, recording the conversation(s) with the man's wife, filing charges he "slapped her around" during their break-up, paints Frey in a different light.

Either Frey is a victim of her own stupidity or she was a willing participant who had a problem "letting go" of the relationship after the relationship ended prefering a violent conclusion (getting slapped around) by hanging on, rather than accept the man's choice to reconcile with his wife and child, wishing her partner well. Relationships hurt when they end, no doubt, but at some point, common sense has to kick in.

Instead, she pressed charges on this man, Frey's "last word" gesture.

Now, let's look at the Peterson case.

Frey gets involved with a man, who, on the SECOND DATE is authorized to pick up her daughter at a day care center, and is given a key to her home.

After another date, she finds out he is married. Frey's relationship is now threatened. This time, the wife, again pregnant, just disappears while walking the dog.

(Could Frey have abducted a pregnant Laci? Sure, anything is possible).

Frey, in the same pattern as the previous one, goes to the police.

Is this enough to cast reasonable doubt on this case?

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott

Originally posted by LadyV
But what does that have to do with him killing his wife...what does it have to do with anything?

It all comes down to character and her credibilty to the jury. It may not be the way things should be, but it is the way things are.

Pundits are now speculating that the new evidence which has been uncovered is going to open the door for Geragos to nail Frey as an inveterate homebreaker and maybe more.

Time will tell.

Your missing my point....I "know" how the judicial system treats woman...what I am referring to, is that what does that have to do with him? Whether she slept with every man in town, and broke up a hundred homes has nothing what-so-ever to do with what he is accused of doing to Laci...what does any of that prove?

Amber Freys sister lives only 7 minutes from Scott and Lacy's house.
I didn't know she had a sister until today .
Does anyone know if her sister will testify?

That is freaky, huh?

It makes you wonder if indeed she was stalking Scott (or Laci) for that matter.

I wonder if Frey's sister knew the people who were robbed across the street. (Didn't they have guns stolen?)

Originally posted by LadyV
Your missing my point....I "know" how the judicial system treats woman...what I am referring to, is that what does that have to do with him? Whether she slept with every man in town, and broke up a hundred homes has nothing what-so-ever to do with what he is accused of doing to Laci...what does any of that prove?

V

You're trying to get me to answer this question as though I am the one who has by fiat declared the situation so. Witnesses, both male and female, are frequently discredited because of their character. Geragos might try to convince the jury that because she has had multiple affairs with married men that she was in fact the one who victimized him or that they were at least victims of one another.

Sexual incontinence is in many peoples eyes synonymous with poor character and Geragos will probably attempt to make that connection.

But instead of trying to entrap me into a debate of the societal victimization of women, why don't we wait to see what Geragos actually does? I have only stated what I think is up.

Originally posted by Bleys
Why would you attempt to impeach her credibility when its irrelevant?

A person's credibility is always relevant. I am not attempting to impeach her credibility. As far as I know, she is beyond reproach. I am saying that Geragos will in all likelihood, at the very least, plant the seeds of doubt about her credibility. Try to remember this. I am Grady Philpott. I am not Mark Geragos. I am in no way involved in this trial. This is a discussion group and we are all speculating as to how the principles will act and how the known and presumed facts will stack up.

Originally posted by mako0956
It makes you wonder if indeed she was stalking Scott (or Laci) for that matter.

I have said from the beginning that nothing in this case stacks up. That's why I have been waiting for a bombshell. Amber's sister is news to me and her and her proximity to Scott certainly raises the specter of a bombshell coming.

As far as I am concerned this case has been riveting.

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott

Originally posted by LadyV


But instead of trying to entrap me into a debate of the societal victimization of women, why don't we wait to see what Geragos actually does? I have only stated what I think is up.

I'm not trying to entrap anyone into a debate sheesh! I honestly don't get it, call me stupid if you like, and I don't care if it's you or someone else that explains it to me... it still doesn't matter whether they were in cahoots together, whether she was stalking him, or what....if the police thought she had some part in Laci's death, they would of taken acting....it would make no sense for an attorney to do this....think I'll now leave this thread...I'm obviously taken wrong here...
By.......

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
A person's credibility is always relevant. I am not attempting to impeach her credibility. As far as I know, she is beyond reproach.

I didn't mean "you" - I meant Geragos, but lets go with that for a moment, simply because I'm interested in your perspective and respect your opinion.

What did Frey testify to that needs to be impeached? She doesn't know if Peterson killed his wife, she didn't say Peterson confessed, etc. How is her credibility important if her testimony was not from recollection, but taped conversations that can be verified?

Where do you suppose Geragos is going with this?

Okay. I thought I had been answering your question, but apparently, I misunderstood. Exactly why Amber's reputation is in question in this case is a puzzlement. It would seem that she was the victim of Scott's philandering and that she has been facilitating the police investigation and that the tapes would speak for themselves.

As I keep saying, nothing so far really adds up and one of the big questions is what was Amber's role in all of this. If she is an innocent victim, why does she need her own high profile attorney who is on television every night proclaiming Peterson's guilt, while insisting that Amber has made no judgement regarding his guilt or innocence.

So the answer to your question is that in this case, I do not know of what relevance Amber's reputation is or even her credibility given the nature of the tapes.

Someone has suggested that she may have been in cahoots with Scott and helping him while the taping was going on. Now it seems that, with the news of Amber's sister, that she might be involved more than anyone ever suspected.

One thing is for sure, the judge dismissed the jurors because new evidence has been uncovered that requires investigation by both sides and given the actions of the judge it has the potential to be a bombshell.

So that is my take on the situation, which I will add, is only opinion, supposition, and conjecture.

[edit on 04/8/18 by GradyPhilpott]

Originally posted by Bleys
I didn't mean "you" - I meant Geragos, but lets go with that for a moment, simply because I'm interested in your perspective and respect your opinion.

What did Frey testify to that needs to be impeached? She doesn't know if Peterson killed his wife, she didn't say Peterson confessed, etc. How is her credibility important if her testimony was not from recollection, but taped conversations that can be verified?

Where do you suppose Geragos is going with this?

Well, at this point, with the new evidence and whatnot it is hard to say. I tried to cover this in my response to V.

Anytime a witness is impeaching a client, the attorney will do his best to impeach the witness. I have had this done to me many times. It is a standard ploy. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.

Many things do not add up in the case and therefore the exact importance of Amber as a witness is questionable and I ask again, why does she need her own attorney? I have never heard of or ever seen a witness show up with an attorney.

All this is what has made this case so interesting.

[edit on 04/8/18 by GradyPhilpott]

Amber Frye is the murderer of Laci Peterson, she had a married mans baby before Scott, then the Scott affair, then another married mans baby. Amber Frye lied about when she found out Scott was married according to a police officer and a private investigator that both say they told her on Dec. 21. I believe that once Amber Frye learned that Scott already had a baby on the way by another woman she killed her. I don't understand why she wants to have babies by other womens husbands but the pattern is clear. I only hope Garagos can pull a Perry Mason and get Amber to admit it on the stand and stop this tragedy to these two porr families. In order to be fair and also show my true feeling about Scott as I did Amber in the Subject of this post let me say......Scott "The Whore" Peterson did NOT kill his wife and baby.

Editor of The-Independent-Journal
www.the-independent-journal.com