Was Mrs. Mitchell murdered?

Court TV CENSORS DEBATE

Author

Comment

peter6456
Member

Registered: Jan 2004
Location:
Posts: 42

This is the REAL SCOOP, on the Peterson case !

Some of the threads on this board are so hilarious, I can't resist joking. But I'm going to be serious now, and this is a rare opportunity. I feel kind of cockey because I was talking to a real hot shot lawyer today and he gave me the scoop on the Peterson case. The only one worth a damn on this case so far is David Sween, and I heard it from somebody who is the absolute best.

The Ace I was talking to has more tricks up his sleave than Johnie Cochran has in his poka dot underwear. He told me that good lawyers do not win in court. To prove his point, he claimed that everybody knows that OJ Simpson is guilty and everybody knows that Scott Peterson is innocent, and the entire court room drama is merely a battle of egos who do whatever it takes, to advocate their theories. Good lawyers, he said, use the truth like a sledgehammer, and they threaten the hell out of the opposition until they win -they don't even need a courtroom.

Is that why Mark Geragos has been gagged? If given the opportunity, he would embarrass the prosecution, until they cried uncle.

Anyways, the long and short of his argument was that the Prosecution is going overboard, in effort to convict Scott Peterson because nobody wants to take the blame for failing to rescue Laci Peterson.

In other words, the truth is not always determined in a court of law. Moreovcer, if the prosecutor had "slam dunk" evidence, he would have hammered Geragos -no need to gag anybody, when the truth is on your side.

It is well acknowledged, within the "BIG SHOT" legal community, that Scott Peterson is NOT GUILTY.

If you are a good lawyer, you will probably understand. A case is not won or lost in court. It is won before the trial.

Now, unless you all work for the PROSECUTION, you will clearly understand what I mean ! Ask F. Lee Bailey, he's crooked enough to know !

Candy75
Senior Member

Registered: Dec 2002
Location: malibu
Posts: 743

I am trying to withhold judgement on guilt, but I honestly at this time do not believe that Scott is guilty.
Too many other avenues that the Prosecution did not follow. Plus, I REALLY quit trusting anything they said when they deliberatly lied to the Rochas (the insurance thing; I have often wondered how the Rochas feel knowing they lied)
The MPD was on a MASSIVE trip to make Scott into Mr. Evil, and to turn everyone against him. It smelled. And still does.
I keep saying; if the evidence is there, it will come out.

__________________
A SNAPSHOT IS WORTHLESS
UNLESS YOU HAVE THE TRUE STORY.
asylum member wanna be

peter6456
Member

Registered: Jan 2004
Location:
Posts: 56

In memory of Vivian Mitchell -an incredible witness.

From what I read of Ms. Mitchell's testimony, she was a very feisty and reliable witness.

Was she murdered?

barskin5.1Ž
Senior Member

Registered: Jan 2004
Location: Boston, Mass (Let's hear it for my Pats!!)
Posts: 210

You know, peter/Beth/jfkawards/jacksonfan (and on and on), no matter what name you come back as time after time after time, you use the same cadence, the same phrasing, the same expressions. Do you really think you cannot be recognized?

What are you talking about?

The murder of Mrs. Mitchell is too predictable. Mrs. Mitchell proved that Laci Peterson was alive on December 24, 2003, despite the fact that every sleazball pundit on television, took a shot at her. Needless to say, Mrs. Mitchell made a fool out of the entire prosecution, and this should make that crystal clear, not to mention this, and this. How convenient for the prosecution, that the woman the police failed to discredit, is now dead. Clearly, murder is the very predictable consequence of this excessive censorship Mrs. Mitchell may be dead, but Scott Peterson is still innocent, despite the fact that the perverts who are trying to prosecute Scott, think that it will be easier now that Mrs. Mitchell is dead.

The latest from the Modesto Bee: [strangely reported to coincide with the death of Vivian Mitchell, February 2004]

"Stanislaus County District Attorney James Brazelton is under investigation on suspicion of brandishing a firearm in his office and making threatening remarks about two Bee reporters, according to several sources close to the inquiry... Several people from the DA's office have been interviewed, and Brazelton has been told to avoid any contact with potential witnesses..."

Was Vivian Mitchell ever warned?

"Bee reporters Michael G. Mooney and Garth Stapley were targets of the alleged threats, sources said. In addition to the verbal threats and brandishing the weapon, Brazelton feigned shooting at a wastebasket while commenting about Mooney, sources said. The alleged threats happened in September, about a month after Mooney and Stapley were co-authors of stories detailing credit card expenditures by Brazelton and Chief Deputy District Attorney John Goold. Their purchases included alcohol, which is a violation of the county's purchasing policy."

Mrs. Mitchell's eyes were wide open, and if somebody like Brazelton did not in effect, promise to shut them, what happened?

671 Date: 2004-02-05 22:17:27
David Sween ( no email / no homepage) wrote:

Sure, Vivian Mitchell died of natural causes -an overdose of the truth. Like Richard Albert Ricci, who was sleeping with his wife when he allegedly murdered Elizabeth Smart, Vivian Mitchell proved that Scott Peterson was sleeping with his wife, when he allegedly murdered Laci. Stupid Prosecutors rely upon the obsession to bury the evidence.

672 Date: 2004-02-06 01:50:13
Peter ( no email / no homepage) wrote:

The prediction that Vivian Mitchell would not survive the trial was made in 2003.

673 Date: 2004-02-06 11:22:13
David Sween ( no email / no homepage) wrote:

It sounds like the DA's office had threatened Vivian Mitchell and the embarrassment would have been an eyeopener for anybody who is still sleepwalking.

674 Date: 2004-02-06 16:55:42
Jin Wang ( no email / no homepage) wrote:

Vivian Mitchell saw Laci Peterson alive hours after police claim her husband killed her.

Is it true? Did Candace DeLong fail to produce the three other pregnant ladies who were supposed to discredit Vivian Mitchell? If that is the case, it makes sense, because Mackenzie was clearly Laci's dog, it did not belong to those other pregnant ladies who may or may not exist.

675 Date: 2004-02-06 17:29:25
David Sween ( no email / no homepage) wrote:

You are absolutely right Jin, Nancy Grace is the DA's National Spokesperson on that score:

NANCY GRACE, COURT TV: Well, frankly, Larry, they did when I first heard them. However, both of those have been thoroughly investigated by police, and it's my understanding -- and I believe this to be true -- that following the sighting of a woman, I believe in her 70s, down the street from 523 Covina, that stated she saw Laci going for a walk, the police canvassed the area and discovered three pregnant women in the same area that were similar to Laci and that one of them had stated she had walked by the witness's home, walking her dog at that time, so they ruled that eyewitness out.

676 Date: 2004-02-06 20:41:26
Lisa Kent ( no email / no homepage) wrote:

That sounds like a compelling motive to keep Vivian Mitchell out of the court room. If the police had decided to use 3 pregnant women that did not exist to discredit Vivian Mitchell, they had created a definite problem. Why is Nancy Grace always in the middle of these scams?

Post A Message

NEWSWORLD SHOWDOWNnsnews