- Where exactly was Laci killed? What is the proof?
- When exactly was Laci killed? What is the proof?
- Why exactly was Laci killed? What is the proof?
- What exactly was the way that Laci was killed? What is the proof?
Even the prosecutors and police knew he was innocent. That is why they avoided any tests that might have proved Scott was innocent, preferring instead speculation without any evidence to back it up. Look at what they did:
- First they tried desperately to prove he wasn't at the bay. They failed.
- Then they tried to find traces of homicide in the house. They failed.
- Then they tried to find traces of homicide in the truck. They failed.
- Then they tried to find traces of homicide in the boat. They failed.
- Then they tried to find traces of homicide in the warehouse. They failed.
- Then they tried to find evidence at the bay. They failed.
- By then they were so desperate that they listened in to his phone calls to his attorneys. They learned nothing.
- They deliberately had all of his private, constitutionally protected conferences with his lawyers held in a 'line up' room, one with a one way mirror and a listening system. (His lawyers have evidence strongly suggesting that they were being watched during those meetings, and ex employees of the department have claimed that it was not unusual for the MPD to listen in to such conversations).
Finally, when the bodies were found, months later, dumped on the shore, they picked them up without sending a forensic tech or a forensic entomologist to check the dump sites out. I have found no evidence that they looked for footprints even though the baby was found immediately adjacent to a walking track. They then used the little they had and spread a one week trial out over 5 months to try to make it appear as if they had actual evidence of Scott's involvement. They had none. To this day there is none. So much for 'proof'.
The prosecution couldn't find even one molecule of evidence - one item that went to guilt and was incapable of innocent explanation.
What sort of case is based on evidence that doesn't exist?