Wednesday, September 3, 2008

Let's talk about the boat. The 14 foot aluminum fishing boat. You know, and these kind of boats have been around for years. And, you know, I know there was a lot of talk that, I don't know if 'talk' is the right word. Maybe insinuation is the right word; that, you know, somehow these are unstable and, you know, they're ready to tip over at the drop of a hat and boy, there's no way that, you know, you could dump a body out of the boat and that's impossible because, you know, it's going to go over and the defendant would have gone in the water, and the whole bit.
Of course, there's no evidence that would have done that. In fact, the guy from the company that makes these boats, remember what he said. He brought the, you know, the pictures to show the tests they do. They fill the boat completely full with water. Completely submerged and it still floats. They put weights on one side, completely submerged, it still floats. They put, I think they put weights in the, let me take a look here.
Yeah, they do side stability tests with the boat full of water. They do level flotation with the boat full of water. They do all these calculations.
And, you know, the things is these aluminum fishing boats, they've been around for years. I can't remember exactly what the guy testified to, I think it was at least 20 years. It was probably more. And don't you think, if these boats were tipping over every time a couple of guys leaned on one side to net a fish, that there, that there would be, we wouldn't have these boats or they would fix them or they would do something?

Three men went out in a similar boat on a Modesto lake. The wind blew up a little, the boat turned over, and two of them were drowned. A larger boat, a cabin cruiser rented for the occasion, say, would not tip over. Once again Distaso is testifying to his opinions with no evidence.

Remember Bruce Peterson? We brought in the guy who sold the boat to the defendant. Remember what he said? Did you ever use that boat? Heck, yeah, I used it all the time. Well, what did you use it for. For fishing. Well, where at? And, you know, he told us a bunch of different places. Who went with you?
My wife. Well, were you and your wife ever on the same side of the boat? Yeah.
Yeah, if she caught a fish, I'd go over there. Did you ever have any problems?
No. Could you get up and walk around? Yeah. Was there any problems? No.

Nonsense. No one gets up and walks around in such a boat.

You know, it's a ridiculous argument to say you can't do this. I mean, look, you've got Laci Peterson in the boat, you sit on the middle of the seat; you know, I'm not saying take Laci Peterson and sit up on the gunwale of the boat, you know, the rim. That's not how you do this. It's easy. Sit on the middle of the seat, pull her up so you kind of counterbalance it, and push her over.
That's it. It's done in probably a minute, or less.

Then why didn’t Distaso try it and film it? Because he didn’t believe it could be done.

You know, you want to see some other pictures, take a look at this exhibit.
Remember what the fisherman said? Here's a guy, here's three adults, full sized adults, fishing in a 13 foot aluminum boat. This one is actually smaller than the defendant's. Three adults in the Bay, standing up in the boat on the same side while they're about to land, I think he said this is a 60 to 70 pound sturgeon.
I said Did you have any problem doing that? He said no. And I think, I can't remember if I asked him or the defense did, but somebody asked him Well, could you pull a big sturgeon in and out of that boat? Yeah. Yeah, he said no problem. Well, you couldn't do it by yourself, could you? He said Yeah, sure I could. He said it just like I said it, you sit on the seat, you pull it in, you know, you put one end up on the side and slide it over. It wouldn't be any problem at all.
There's no evidence to contradict that whatsoever.

Except Distaso’s own. He claimed elsewhere that this boat was too small to fish for sturgeon. Which is it?

You know, there was a question how could Laci Peterson fit in the boat. I know we talked about that. Well, here's Kim Fulbright, a member of my office. She weighed, I think Laci weighed a hundred and 53 pounds. I think the testimony was Kim weighed a hundred and 57 pounds. They were both about the exact time of pregnancy. At least very close. And, you know, here she is. She fits right in the boat, no problem. In fact, she disappears underneath the side of the boat, if you look at it. And this is in the back compartment.

Except she wasn’t dead, she climbed in and out on her own and there was no rigor mortis.

Throw the boat cover on there, no one's going to see a thing.

Unless you are towing the boat.

Here's from the middle compartment. Same thing. In fact, in the middle compartment, she disappears even more.
And finally, here's her in the front compartment. You can't see her at all.
So for anyone to get up and argue to you that you can't put a pregnant woman in that 14 foot boat, it's just not true.

While she’s alive, sure.

What else do we know about the boat? Nobody knew about it. No one, all the friends, family, the Peterson family, Rochas, nobody knew the defendant had bought a boat. So you've got this secret purchase going on.
Why do you keep that boat secret? Remember Ron and Sharon were I think at the defendant's home on December 15th with the defendant and Laci. Remember Ron said Hey, you know what, I got Sharon out fishing today. It was kind of a rare event because it's not something she did a lot. Oh, yeah, they talked about fishing, talked about what they did. Nobody mentioned the boat.
The boat was bought on December 9th. Why not? If Laci knew about the boat, remember what Sharon said. She would talk to her about purchases. She would talk to her about what was going on in her life. Nobody said she was a wallflower, afraid to talk. In fact, the testimony was kind of contrary to that.
Nobody knew about the boat, even his own family.

A man is keeping a purchase 'secret' A FEW DAYS BEFORE CHRISTMAS. Is he the only person in the world doing that at that time?

Remember the boat cover. You all probably wondered why we spent so much time talking about the boat cover. Well, other than the points I already made about it, there's something really important about it. Remember where it was stored?
Remember, I mean remember where they found it, is what I should say.
Okay. You've got this boat cover. It was in the back of the defendant's truck.
I think the testimony was it was in the back of the defendant's truck on December 24th. I might be wrong about that. There might not be any testimony on it until the 26th.
But regardless, this is the boat cover for the boat. If you have a boat cover for your boat, why isn't it with your boat? Why isn't it in your boat? Why isn't it on your boat? Why isn't it in the warehouse where you keep your boat?

You don’t need a boat cover INSIDE a warehouse.

All legitimate questions, unless you used it as part of killing your wife.
And then maybe what would you do? Well, maybe, instead of leaving it there in your warehouse, or keeping it in your boat, or keeping it here under this covered patio, or keeping it here in this particular shed, you'll walk it all the way around your house, remember this gate's locked, you can't even go in there, so you walk it all the way around your house, you put it in the shed that's farthest from anything else, and then open, I mean, then put a leaky gas blower on top of it so it's completely saturated with gas. It smells like gas.

Why didn’t the MPD ask for it then? Scott never insisted on a search warrant – even after Brocchini stole items from the house and truck.

Remember what Detective, remember what Detective Brocchini testified to when the defendant called him on the 25th? Hey, are you using cadaver dogs? You know, kind of a funny question right out of the gate like that. Are you using cadaver dogs?
Remember what Captain Boyer said about gasoline? It throws off cadaver dogs.

And Scott would know this because . . . . ?

6 comments:

lessthannormal said...

You Rock!- but remember, he was convicted in the media, long before trial....

DanWalker said...

If Scott was convicted in the media -- good for the media.

The fact is there was more than ample evidence. Her DNA was found in his boat, in his tool box, in a pair of pliars. With her hair.

Now - you go on 1000 fishing boats, and see if the dead wife's hair and DNA is in the pliars. Remember, she didnt even know he had the boat. He kept it hidden from her. He wasnt even a fisherman.

The big thing for me, though, was that Scott said she was fine with him going fishing far away, on Christmas Eve, when she could give birth any day. This was her first child -- she was nervous and would not want her husband hours away.

I have four children - and I know a woman wouldnt want you to go to the store down the street when she is about to give birth.

Scott lied his behind off -- why? he lied about why he was gone on Christmas Eve, lied about his wife telling him he should go fishing.

Scott had promised Amber he would be with her -- she was getting pissed. If Scott didn't do something by Christmas - Scott wasnt going to get nookie from Amber -- and he knew it.

Thats why he killed his wife. He is that selfish and evil.

I'd like to hear more about the OTHER women Scott killed. I don't think this was the first woman he murdered. Nor would it have been the last. He was a spoiled brat kid who was raised to think he could get anything he wanted, and his mommy would cover for him. He was entitled to any and all pleasures he wanted, no matter at the cost of death to others.

Spoiled brat syndrom.

One good thing - Scott has almost wiped out his parents financially.

Burkey said...

Hey Voice Of Sanity,

Your blog is great, your comments are always great, and I really dig that you've been strong for Peterson all this time.

Thanks for the food for thought and inspiration. You do rock.

Bruce Dombrowski said...

I wonder whay scott would ask about cadaver dogs less than a day after his wife "goes missing".....interesting

no, a cover is not needed in a warehouse, but to keep it away from the boat does not make sense...

Burkey said...

Wow, the hair in the pliers looks like real evidence to someone.

And no, no DNA or anything else of Laci's was found in the toolbox.

And the cadaver dogs, when they were called, did not alert in any of the places where the police said there was a crime scene: in the house, the warehouse, the boat. Not once.

Burkey said...

Oh and regarding this:
"One good thing - Scott has almost wiped out his parents financially."

OK, so "Dan Walker" (a blogger without a blog, wouldn't you know) is not only anonymous for all practical purposes, but he's also an asshole.

Those people, the Petersons, never did anything to you, "Mr. Walker".

Karma.