Geragos versus TRASH

 
     May 29, 2003

Stanislaus County prosecutors notified 66 people whose conversations were intercepted from Jan. 10 to Feb. 4 under a wiretap used to gather evidence for the investigation into Laci Peterson's disappearance. During one conversation on Jan. 20, Peterson told Amber that he had hired a private investigator and if the police are trying to promote the suggestion that Scott Peterson wanted this investigator to cover up the truth about the murder of Laci Peterson, they better prove it, because if they do not, they are guilty of conspiring to cover up the truth about the murder of Laci Peterson.

No doubt, this private investigator is either cooperating with the police or he is afraid to reveal what he has learned. When Frey asked Peterson if he had anything to do with his wife's disappearance, Scott said, "No, but I know who did it and I'll tell you later when I see you." In other words, somebody was feeding Peterson information about his wife's murder and those details have been kept from the public because Scott's private investigator has been gagged. Clearly, if ABC News can't even get Scott Peterson's investigator to talk to them, it's because Scott Peterson did not murder his wife, and the police need the time to feed him the lines they require to turn the hunt for Scott Peterson into the most involved lynching of the 21st century.

Make no mistake about it, if this private investigator had any information relating to Scott Peterson's involvement in the murder of Laci, the National Enquirer would have reported it by now. Instead, the National Enquirer reports stupid stories about hair on Scott Peterson's pliers and challenges the journalistic standards of anybody who reports that Laci was walking her dog on Christmas Eve. Needless to say, when the National Enquirer is fit to challenge the credibility of everybody who saw Laci Peterson walking her dog on Christmas eve, we should feel good about our own credibility, especially since Laci Peterson's own dog supports the claim, and they are known to be very reliable. The simple truth is that Scott Peterson had no reason to believe that his wife was anywhere near harms way when he bid her farewell on Christmas Eve, and everything else is currently unsubstantiated speculation.

One would expect the police to demonstrate the fact that they are more credible than the National Enquirer is, but they have not. In fact, the police are so absolutely desperate to implicate Scott Peterson to Laci's disappearance that on the very day that ABC News failed to interview Scott Peterson's private investigator, they used KTVU's website to promote the follwing rumors:

"However, rumors have spread that Scott Peterson may have given his former mistress Amber Frey some jewelry that belonged to Laci. Fox News Senior Correspondent Rita Cosby, appearing Wednesday on KTVU's Mornings on 2, said a source has confirmed the the rumor."

The absolute zeal to demonize Scott Peterson is very clear and the lack of any evidence to implicate Scott Peterson is comparatively deafening. The police intercepted Scott Peterson's calls because they were trying to get Scott to confess to murder, and it is not very difficult to understand the fact that if Scott Peterson had any direct knowledge about the disappearance of his wife, he would have challengesd alternative theories about the murder of Laci Peterson. When Scott Peterson enthusiastically embraced the claim that he was on the trail of Laci's murderers, he proved that he was innocent because he acted, not like somebody who was trying to cover up the truth, but like an excited Mark Geragos, who was enthusiastic and eager to explore the mystery surrounding the murder of Laci Peterson.

If the Police think they can terrorize and gag everybody who clearly understands the fact that Scott Peterson did not murder Laci, they have overestimated their power. The Police even monitored a Jan. 29 call between Scott Peterson and Modesto private investigator Gary Ermoian, and if they had any reason to believe that Scott Peterson murdered Laci, KTVU would have reported fact, slanderous rumors aside.

Scott Peterson is the only one who is not playing the game, "let's make the facts fit the theory." When Scott Peterson indicated that he knew who murdered Laci, he was as enthusiastic as Mark Geragos was when he initially investigated the facts surrounding the murder of Laci Peterson. Mark Geragos said, "the prosecution has no case and what's more disturbing is there are legitimate leads that point in other directions." Mark Geragos was duped into thinking that he had credible leads, but that does not justify pointing the finger at Scott Peterson.

There is no mystery about the serial murderers who killed Laci. The M.O. was clearly defined when they kidnapped and murdered Chandra Levy, and if they manage to get away with murder again, it is certainly not a consequence of the fact that Scott Peterson hired a private investigator in effort to discover the truth. Enough is enough, don't you think?

If I or anybody else is wrong about the possibility that the murders of Chandra Levy and Laci are connected, it doesn't matter because it is not even remotely plausible to challenge any honest attempt to investigate, unless the effort is a deliberate, malignant diversion which intends to cover up the truth. And so, the next time you hear a rumor about the murder of Laci Peterson, it is time to ask the question, "Who is leaking the information and why?"

Unfortunately, the news is not necessarily reliable. The news is frequently a vehicle of dissemination -an object of publicity. When the National Enquirer claims that every single person who spotted Laci alive, on Christmas Eve, is wrong, we take the position that Laci's dog was not deliberately trained to create the false impression that Scott Peterson is innocent. Scott Peterson is simply innocent because the obsession to prove otherwise has failed.

[ Update | Search | Topics ]




360  Date: 2003-01-28 15:21:05
Alana Green ( no email / no homepage) wrote:

imho claims that she is authorized to spy on me, on RFK Jr. and on anybody else who exposes the fact that Ken Littleton is the violent, sex pervert who murdered Martha Moxley.

Funny isn't it. IMHO wants to make sure that Michael Skakel stays framed and Detective Barskin is trying to frame Scott Peterson.

What a Team !

359 Date: 2003-01-26 23:10:46
barskin ( barskin@mailchicago.com / no homepage) wrote:

The tradgedy of the what are quite possibly the circumstances of the Laci Peterson case is far too commonplace an occurance. Husbands kill their wives; it's a sad fact of life. Which is not to say it is an absolute fact that Scott Peterson killed Laci Peterson, but it is not an unlikely conclusion. This is why the Rocha family has publicly renounced him and called on him to finally cooperated fully with the police. The woman, Amber Frey, who had known and had a realtionship with Scott Peterson, thinking that he was single, for a little more than a month was obviously overwhelmed with emotion and sorrow as well as shock at being thrust into this public maelstrom.
The Modesto Police most probably know and are doing much more than they are making public. In other words, they are doing their job, trying to locate the whereabouts of Laci Peterson and the perpertrator responsible for the crime. There is no indication of a "frame-up," just law enforcement working a standard criminal case .

358  Date: 2003-01-25 03:51:57
HOW TO FRAME SCOTT PETERSON ( no email / no homepage) wrote:

The Police use this BIMBO, Paula Jones-type to drive a wedge between Scott Peterson and his family, and then they claim that she has been eliminated as a suspect, but Scott Peterson hasn't. DUH ! Don't make the campaign to use this STUPID BIMBO, to frame Scott Peterson, any more obvious. ARE THE POLICE ABSOLUTE MORONS ?

Detective Barskin, are those MORONS your buddies?

357  Date: 2003-01-23 21:13:29
Is this why Barskin attacks Cathy Collie? ( no email / no homepage) wrote:

And anybody who believes that Laci Peterson and Chandra Levy were the targets of the very same perverts?

In '98, Ken Starr had 60 FBI detailed full time to track down and interview Monica Lewinsky's girlfriends for what she told them about President Clinton. The friends were then put before a grand jury to tell their stories, all of which became thousands of pages of lewd stories, of no possible provability, most likely the product of Lewinsky's imagination, trying to impress her friends.

Throughout the Clinton years and actually beginning while he was governor of Arkansas, Republican operatives were conniving to bring forward women who would make accusations against Bill Clinton. A fair person, examining the accusations in detail, would have to be extremely skeptical at the truthfulness of those women. And then you're left with the integrity of the entire Republican party including the "moderates" who never raised their voices to stop the vicious campaign against Clinton. History will call them craven cowards.

Now fastforward to the year 2001, the "Starr Squad" transfers it's skills and they lock up Chandra Levy in a hotel room for the purpose of a vicious interrogation, the way they did when they wanted to get Monica Lewinsky to say that she had sex with President Bill Clinton. I have heard that if Monica Lewinsky was released from that predicament [Starr muzzled her with an immunity deal that forbade her to discuss the "politics" of her "situation"], Monica Lewinsky would have been Time Magazine's whistleblower of the year.

You can click here !

Is this the very same group that is responsible for vilifying Scott Peterson? Clearly, the relentless effore to create the false impression that he murdered Laci Peterson has been absolutely vicious.

356  Date: 2003-01-22 19:15:29
Experience and vast knowlege of criminal behavior . ( no email / no homepage) wrote:

A Miscarriage of Justice

Celebrity trials can turn into media lynchings. Last year a Connecticut jury convicted Michael Skakel of killing his neighbor Martha Moxley twenty-seven years ago, even though the prosecution had no fingerprints, no DNA, and no witness. The author, a former New York City prosecutor, argues that his cousin's indictment was triggered by an inflamed media, and that an innocent man is now in prison.

BY ROBERT F. KENNEDY

The tragedy of Martha Moxley's death, twenty-seven years ago, has been compounded by the conviction of an innocent man.

I know Michael Skakel, my first cousin, as well as one person can know another. He helped me to get sober, in 1983. We attended hundreds of alchoholism-recovery meetings together. In that context and others we have shared our deepest feelings. For fifteen years we skied, fished, hiked, and traveled together, often with my wife and children. During that time I sometimes spent as many as two or three weekends a month in his company. Like nearly everyone else who knows him well, I love Michael. If he were guilty, I would have testified against him. He is not.

Until recently I visited him in prison. The two of us had been estranged for several years. Beginning in 1998, stress from the public focus of Michael as a murder suspect began to affect his personality. He lashed out at the Kennedy family, which he believed was partly responsible for his predicament, and refused to speak to me. On the two days I attended his court proceedings last year in Norwalk Connecticut, he was cold and distant. Many people asked me why I would publicly defend him - a cause unlikely to enhance my own credibility. I support him not out of misguided family loyalty but because I am certain he is innocent.

The Skakels did not discuss the Moxley case amongst themselves, and mostly didn't read press reports about it - the first because of family culture and legal advice, the second because most of the press coverage was biased, inaccurate, and painful. "We never talked about it," Michael's sister, Julie, recently told me. "Through all the years we never discussed this. We never compared notes." Michael's conviction shocked his six siblings into talking about the case with one another, and with me. For the first time, they shared their memories of the night when Martha Moxley was killed. In preparing this article I spoke to each of them; to other witnesses, to Michael's lawyers; and to investigators. I read police and press reports about the case and put together the story for myself.

MARTHA MOXLEY

Just after noon on Halloween, 1975, Martha Moxley, age fifteen, was found lying face down on her family property in the Belle Haven section of Greenwich, Connecticut. Her blue jeans and underpants were pulled down. Although strong evidence suggests that the attack was a sexual assault, the police concluded that Martha had not been raped. Her body had been dragged across the grass on a zigzag path from the Moxley driveway to the side of the lawn and hidden below the drooping boughs of a pine tree. She had been struck several times in the head with a Toney Penna golf club - so ferociously that the club had shattered into multiple pieces - and then stabbed in the neck with the broken shaft. The club's handle and part of the shaft had vanished.

Martha was last seen the night before, at the home of the Moxley's neighbor Rushton Skakel, my mother's brother and the father of six boys and a girl. The Skakel family residence contained many golf clubs, including a set of Toney Pennas that had belonged to Rushton's wife, Anne Reynolds Skakel, who died of cancer two years before. The Skakels played chip and putt in their yard, and were known for leaving sports equipment scattered around the property. Rushton kept golf glubs at each door, and would carry one on his daily walk in order to ward off the numerous dogs in Belle Haven.

KEN LITTLETON

In 1975 Kenneth Wayne Littleton Jr. was a burly twenty-three-year-old graduate of Williams College, where he'd played rugby; he taught science and coached football at the Brunswick School, in Greenwich. Rushton Skakel had hired Littleton as a live-in tutor and companion to care for his motherless children. Littleton had begun work for the Skakels and visited their home the previous week, and moved in on the day of the murder.

Under police questioning the following day Littleton claimed that after arriving home from dinner he had gone to the master bedroom, on the second floor, where heremained until morning. He said he had neither heard nor seen anything suspicious. Two weeks later, on November 14, Littleton admitted that he had not stayed upstairs but had gone downstairs to watch TV and had seen Tom and Michael Skakel outside with Martha Moxley. He would later deny ever having seen Martha. On December 10 Littleton again changed his story, now saying that from 9:15 to 9:30 he had left the house and walked around the property to look for the Skakel boys. Littleton told the police that he saw no one during his search.

On April 2, 1976, Mildred Ix, Helen's mother and a confidante of Rushton's, told police that "girlie magazined were found in Mr. Littleton's room," and that he was in the habit of visiting the Skakel gazebo in the nude. She urged them to look again at Littleton. When detectives questioned him later that month, he changed his story for the third time, saying that on the evening of October 30 he had come down to thew first floor after watching TV upstairs. When he entered the kitchen, the Skakels' elderly nanny, Margaret Sweeney, asked him to check the driveway, where she'd heard "a fracas caused by the kids." Littleton now said that he went to the area and saw no one, but heard rustling noices coming from the Bushes. Police records kept by Jack Solomon show that Littleton now recalled leaving the Skakel house at 10:30 P.M. -an hour later than he'd earlier claimed. Police examiners gave Littleton three lie-detector tests on October 18, 1976. Each test indicated that Littleton was lying when he denied killing Martha Moxley or knowing the location of the missing golf-club pieces. The police confronted Littleton with his test results and asked him to submit to a sodium-pentothal examination. When Littleton refused, the police began looking more closely. They found that his behavior had changed "markedly" since Martha's death.

In April of 1976 Rushton Skakel had fired Littleton after the police visited the Skakel home and reported that Littleton had wrapped his car around a tree in a drunken accident and then abandoned it. Littleton moved to Nantucket, where he traded his preppy clothes for a white outfit with a shark's-tooth necklace framed by an unbuttoned shirt. Walking around town, he would look at himself in store windows, fixing his hair and flexing his muscles. People who had known him previously told the police that he was "bizarre and obnoxious" and had changed for the worse. That summer the Nantucket police arrested Littleton on charges of burglarizing several gift shops. In July, Littleton knocked down a woman employee of the Nantucket Police Department after she casually bumped his dancing partner. That month a Nantucket tourist awoke to find Littleton lying naked on top of her. He had broken in through her bedroom window. Littleton was then living with a woman who told police that he sometimes "forced himself on her sexually" and often erupted in fits of violence, smashing things in her apartment.

When the Greenwich police learned of Littleton's arrest, they persuaded Nantucket prosecutors to offer to reduce Littletone's felony charges to misdemeanor if he would submit to a sodium-amytal interview about the Moxley murder. Littleton refused and pleaded guilty to the felony - a plea that ended his teaching and coaching career. In May of 1977 the Nantucket court gave him a suspended sentence and placed him on probation. In explaining his crime spree to the judge, Littleton said. "When I drink, I flip out."

Jack Solomon, of the Fairfield County state attorney's office, and the Greenwich detective Stephen Carroll were convinced that Littleton had murdered Martha Moxley. But they lacked the hard evidence they needed for an effective prosecution. The many other plausible suspects would give potential defense attorneys ample opportunity to introduce reasonable doubt, which would prevent a jury from convicting Littleton. The common thinking was that only a confession would result in a conviction. Solomon and Browne resisted the temptation to arrest a suspect in the murder just to appease public demand that they solve it. And so the Moxley case murder investigation petered out and became a "cold file."

In 1982 Littleton moved to Florida, where he lived as a street person and was arrested for a variety of crimes, including trespassing, disorderly conduct, drunk driving, public intoxication, and shoplifting. In one incident he climbed a sixteen-story structure and gave President John F. Kennedy's 'Ich bin ein Berliner' speech. When he was arrested, he told the police that he was a "Kenny Kennedy," the black sheep of the Kennedy family.

That year Littleton met Mary Baker, who was also an alcoholic and was in recovery. They moved to Canada and married in Ottawa on April 27, 1983. In a 1991 interview with the Connecticut police conducted in Ottawa - an interview that has never been published - Baker described Littleton as "going nuts" in February of 1984 after he started talking about the Moxley murder. He called Martha's father, David Moxley, Baker said, and asked for money to undergo sodium-pentothal testing, offering to give Moxley copies of the tapes. Littleton said he thought the testing would give him peace of mind and perhaps help him to remember things that happened the night of the murder. He told Moxley that Martha's murder was their "mutual tragedy." Despite his offer to David Moxley, Littleton never did submit to a sodium-pentothal test, although, according to his wife, he remained obsessed by the idea.

In Canada, Littleton was unable to work owing to instability and alchoholism. He and Baker played golf and lived of money she had inherited. Baker told the police that Littleton liked pornography and would often visit strip bars. In June of 1983 his arm was mangled during a knife fight in Hull, Quebec. That autumn the Canadian police arrested him for disruptive conduct near the Canadian Parliament building. After his release, the couple moved to Belmont, near Boston.

According to Baker, Littleton sometimes threatened to kill her. He would become particularly depressed, she told the police, around Halloween, the anniversary of Martha's murder. In october of 1989 she threw him out and separated from him. In May of 1990 he threw hot coffee on her and tried to force his way into her house. Littleton moved in with a manic-depressive stripper named Kimberley, in Boston's Combat Zone. He planned to become a male stripper and join Kimberley in her act. He and Baker were divorced on July 12, 1990.

By August of 1991, when Connecticut law-enforcement authorities reopened the Moxley case, Littleton, still a prime suspect, had again been institutionalized, for manic depression and oaranoid delusions, at McLean Hospital, in Belmont. Jack Solomon; Sergeant Frank Garr, of the Greenwich police; and Detroit homicide detectives, whom the Greenwich police had brought in to help them with their investigation, all believed that Littleton might be responsible for a string of unsolved homicides in Massachusetts, Florida, Maine, New York and Canada. On September 23, 1991, Garr went to Ottawa to examine the police files on three young women who had disappeared during a twenty-three-day period in 1988. None of the bodies were ever found. In Garr's report he concluded, "All three women were last seen in the same vicinity...within close proximity to where Ken Littleton had resided."

On December 15, 1992, Littleton took a polygraph exam administered by the nationally recognized polygraph expert Robert Brisentine. The test again indicated that Littleton "was not truthful when he denied causing the death of Miss Moxley." After confirming these results in a second test, Brisentine left the examining room. According to someone close to the conversation, he took Solomon aside and said, "The man who murdered Martha Moxley is sitting in that room. Don't ever let anyone persuade you otherwise." A similar version of the same event is reported in Timothy Dumas's 'Greentown' (1988). Brisentine himself recently told me that he doesn't recall having said that, but added that he did ask to interrogate Littleton further at the time, because "even if he didn't commit the crime, he definitely had guilty knowledge of the crime and probably knows who did it." By now Littleton had failed five polygraphs about the Moxley murder.

355  Date: 2003-01-21 16:55:47
barskin ( barskin@mailchicago.com / no homepage) wrote:

And, do you know what else everybody knows? Scott Peterson is a lying, greedy, scumbag. Do you think that he isn't? Tell me exactly why.

354  Date: 2003-01-21 16:44:21
barskin ( barskin@mailchicago.com / no homepage) wrote:

Everybody "knows," huh? Well the Moxley family knows that Michael Skakel is the real killer. So does the jury.

353  Date: 2003-01-21 16:23:57
Bobbie Nevie ( no email / no homepage) wrote:

True, but everybody knows that Ken Littleton is the real murderer.

Ken Littleton
-so what are you bragging about?

352  Date: 2003-01-21 15:53:10
barskin ( barskin@mailchicago.com / no homepage) wrote:

Hell will freeze over, huh? Brrrrrr. Maybe that's why it's so cold!
Hey, Bobbie, look around you. Everything I described about the Peterson case has ALREADY happened. It's all working. And, as you said, Michael Skakel is in prison. Hah!

351  Date: 2003-01-21 15:18:40
Bobbie Nevie ( no email / no homepage) wrote:

What a lovely fantasy ! Barskin thinks that his ability to hog every message board on the Internet is his ticket to pervert justice. Oh we all know how YOU PERVERTS, routinely pervert justice, don't we?

You want to know a little a little secret? Hell will freeze over before any of YOU MORONS successfully frame Gary Condit or Scott Peterson because they have something you lack. It's called a brain, a heart and credibility. Too bad publicity can't change that Barskin.

It does not take a brain surgeon, to figure out the fact that Ken Littleton murdered Martha Moxley. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. certainly made that absolutely clear, in the January issue of the Atlantic Monthly, where he proved the fact that celebrity trials turn into media lynchings.

"Police examiners gave Littleton three lie-detector tests on October 18, 1976. Each test indicated that Littleton was lying when he denied killing Martha Moxley or knowing the location of the missing golf-club pieces." Littleton's behavior is so creepy and bizarre, that he is clearly absolutely nothing beyond a violent, mentally unstable, sexual pervert.

Three months after being questioned by the Keystone Cops, "Littleton knocked down a woman employee of the Nantucket Police Department after she casually bumped his dancing partner. That month, a Nantucket tourist awoke to find Littleton lying naked on top of her. He had broken in through her bedroom window. Littleton was then living with a woman who told police that he sometimes "forced himself on her sexually and often erupted in fits of violence, smashing things in her apartment." In the meantime, while the sexual pervert who murdered Martha Moxley, has immunity from prosecution, it is fair to say that the extremely SICK BASTARDS who framed Michael Skakel, give perverted murderers like Ken Littleton the opportunity to roam the streets without being castrated.

This is how the scumbags managed to frame Michael Skakel:

Dominick Dunne

Keep trying to frame Scott Peterson SCUMBAGS, it's very entertaining to watch. I guess you Ken Littleton-style Lunatics, hold all the cards. You know where the body is, you know whose golf club to use, and if people get too suspicious, you can even produce the body, to cover up the Modus Operandi which has already been firmly established. You Creeps are TOO SMART for your own good !

Chandra Levy

350  Date: 2003-01-21 13:45:58
barskin ( barskin@mailchicago.com / no homepage) wrote:

Well, Bobbie. The framing of Gary Condit is going right on schedule, thanks for asking!
As for the Peterson case, well that has been a masterpiece! We managed to trick Scott into getting $200,000 more life insurance on Laci that he had on himself. That looks bad for poor Scottie. And then we talked him into geting that girlfriend and INSISTED that he tell her that he was "divorced." Hah! Another bad one for the boy. Then we told him to go fishing for sturgeon on December 24. Wow! And he fell for it! We knew that would sound so bogus, because his new fishing boat was far, far too small to handle catch that size, so we knew the police would find this alibi extremely dubious (I mean the police that AREN'T on our payroll). Then (oh this was brilliant) we made sure that he would be seen by absolutely no one on December 24 so his alibi could never be verified. Too much, huh? We told Scott to not let the police into the house after he reported her missing and a possible crime victim. Well, the house, if Laci were taken after Scott left, would be a crime scene, so naturally they would need to look for clues there, and they had to go and get a search warrant, because of Scott's refusal to just give them permission. Yet another way we made Scott look bad. Now the girl friend, being one of our operatives, got in touch with the police after the story hit the news, and well, the rest is history. Ahhh. A work of genius, don't you think, Bobbie? Again, thanks for your continued appreciation of the mechanizations of myself and my goons!

349  Date: 2003-01-21 03:30:50
Bobbie Nevie ( no email / no homepage) wrote:

Hey Barskin,

Why don't you break into Scott Peterson's home and see if you can find a murder weapon to use, in your attempt to frame Scott Peterson?

Hey, you guys did a good job with Michael Skakel, what's happening with Condit?

When are you going to feed Dunne some more "evidence"?

No doubt, you and your kind must know where Laci's body is, you can pull a "Ken Littleton":

Ken Littleton

348  Date: 2003-01-21 01:53:31
barskin ( barskin@mailchicago.com / no homepage) wrote:

Aw, gee, Bobbie. You asked my a question, and I answered. I answered accurately. I guess this concept (answering a direct question with a direct answer) is an unfamiliar concept to you. Well, let me do this- let me introduce you. Bobbie, this is reality. Reality, this is Bobbie. Public opinion in the country in OVERWHELMINGLY on the side of believing that Scott Peterson is involved and/or responsible for his wife's disappearance. You, Bobbie, exist on the fringe of the fringe with your belief. You, and whoever else is in your tiny group of believers, have no effect whatsoever on the public discourse on this or any other issue. Sorry, babe.

347  Date: 2003-01-20 21:13:14
Bobbie Nevie ( no email / no homepage) wrote:

What a joke you are ! Aren't you supposed to frame Gary Condit, before you shoot your mouth out about Scott Peterson? What a pathetic MORON you are.

If you think that Scott Peterson will ever be convicted for anything, you must work for the Washington DC Police Force.

Hey listen you stupid moron, if you want to prove what a hot shot you are, solve the Levy case first:

Chandra Levy

In the meantime, GO TO HELL !

Cathy was right, you must be one of those useless, MORON COPS who torture confessions out of innocent people.

You're from Chicago, aren't you?

How crazy are the people who MURDERED CHANDRA LEVY?

Chandra Levy

346  Date: 2003-01-20 21:01:33
barskin ( barskin@mailchicago.com / no homepage) wrote:

How many people are missing Cathy and feel that she is right about the Laci Peterson case? Well, let me answer that for you, Bobbie. Some people do miss the laughs they got from her ludicrous posts, that's true. A lot of people thought she was so crazy that she was downright hilarious. How many people agree with her?; well, a whopping zero. Some people are waiting for further proof, but, by far, most people are convinced that Scott Peterson is a greedy, lying scumbag. The big debate is whether the girl friend (or one of them, anyway) was involved.
But- wait- hold the presses. I agree with you on one thing. Scott Peterson is a buffoon. If you ever watched the cases on Court TV, like the rest of us who post on the CTV message boards , you would see a steady parade of buffoons just like Scott Peterson, people who think they can kill their spouses and get away with it. Sometimes it takes a while to find the body, and sometimes the body is never found but there is enough evidence that the victim is dead. These buffoons are now buffoons in prison for life. Scott Peterson will be joining their ranks eventually.

345  Date: 2003-01-20 15:49:39
Bobbie Nevie ( no email / no homepage) wrote:

Cathy, many people at Court TV are missing you and claim that you were probably right about the Laci Peterson case. This is the question that everybody is still pondering?

"In my opinion, the key to solving this mystery is the answer to this question:

How crazy are the people who are responsible for the murder of Chandra Levy?

Chandra Levy

The M.O. of both cases appears to be the same, and that is tragically the only lead, to date."

I assume that the M.O. is the fact that both women vanished without a trace and without their purses, which suggests that they were selectively and professionally targeted.

To be sure, Chandra Levy eventually turned up, and the motivation behind that is quite obvious, isn't it? The effort to frame a jogger failed, the effort to frame Gary Condit failed, and Scott Peterson has refused to allow the zeal to vilify him, to create the impression that Scott Peterson is responsible for the disappearance of his own wife.

Needless to say, the Police ARE NOT cooperating with Scott Peterson.

344  Date: 2003-01-07 05:33:15
Cathy -for Barskin ( no email / no homepage) wrote:

Prosecutor: Who did it Mark?

Fuhrman: It was the Husband.

Prosecutor: Great, make the case Mark.

Fuhrman: The wife vanished without a trace sir.

Prosecutor: How do we link the husband?

Fuhrman: He was fishing sir.

Prosecutor: So?

Fuhrman: It was Christmas Eve sir.

Prosecutor: So?

Fuhrman: And she was pregnant sir.

Prosecutor: So?

Fuhrman: That's it sir.

Prosecutor: Where's the cover up Mark?

Fuhrman: What cover up sir?

Prosecutor: How long did he waste before he reported her missing?

Fuhrman: He reported it as soon as he got home from fishing sir?

Prosecutor: Duh, did he pretend that she was out shopping or something?

Fuhrman: No sir

Prosecutor: How do you know that Mark.

Fuhrman: She vanished without her purse sir.

Prosecutor: Is that the Chandra Levy M.O.

Fuhrman: Yes sir.

Prosecutor: How do we pin it on the husband Mark.

Fuhrman: I'll call Dominick Dunne and get back to you sir.

Dominick Dunne

343  Date: 2003-01-26 08:16:20
Sarah Jones ( law.sarah@caramail.com / Chandra Levy) wrote:

In '98, Ken Starr had 60 FBI detailed full time to track down and interview Monica Lewinsky's girlfriends for what she told them about President Clinton. The friends were then put before a grand jury to tell their stories, all of which became thousands of pages of lewd stories, of no possible provability, most likely the product of Lewinsky's imagination, trying to impress her friends.

Throughout the Clinton years and actually beginning while he was governor of Arkansas, Republican operatives were conniving to bring forward women who would make accusations against Bill Clinton. A fair person, examining the accusations in detail, would have to be extremely skeptical at the truthfulness of those women. And then you're left with the integrity of the entire Republican party including the "moderates" who never raised their voices to stop the vicious campaign against Clinton. History will call them craven cowards.

Now fastforward to the year 2001, the "Starr Squad" transfers it's skills and they lock up Chandra Levy in a hotel room for the purpose of a vicious interrogation, the way they did when they wanted to get Monica Lewinsky to say that she had sex with President Bill Clinton. I have heard that if Monica Lewinsky was released from that predicament [Starr muzzled her with an immunity deal that forbade her to discuss the "politics" of her "situation"], Monica Lewinsky would have been Time Magazine's whistleblower of the year.

There is not a single shred of evidence which even remotely suggests that Laci's husband had anything to do with the fact that Laci vanished without a trace.

The Laci disappearance is not being treated like a criminal investigation, it is merely a Mark Fuhrman-type effort to pervert justice because it appears to be linked to the politically explosive disappearance of Chandra Levy.

Chandra Levy was a target of the covert effort to publicly expose Gary Condit's private sex life, and her disappearance is merely a consequence of a Sexual McCarthyism that is so perverse and so obsessive, that it almost forced the resignation of the President of the United States.

The disappearance of Laci Peterson is the smokescreen which is supposed to divert attention away from the fact that the murder of Chandra Levy is an unsolved crime.

Let it backfire:

Chandra Levy


342  Date: 2003-01-09 02:48:50
Very Informative ! ! ! ( no email / no homepage) wrote:

The claim that magic dolphins escorted Elian Gonzalez to safety while they heartlessly watched his mother drown because Peggy Noonan wanted to produce the Prince of Whales who was supposed to liberate Fidel Castro's Cuba, makes me fart.

Click Here, and you will CLEARLY UNDERSTAND!

341  Date: 2003-01-08 17:31:04
Looking for Work ! ( no email / no homepage) wrote:

The campaign to lynch Gary Condit for the murder of Chandra Levy failed, and Mark needs to lynch Laci's husband, to regain his credibility.

It's the Fuhrman way !

340  Date: 2003-01-08 17:02:52
Fuhrman Report ( no email / no homepage) wrote:

Fuhrman Report
_____________

We cannot successfully frame Laci's husband without 4ensics. We need Dr. Lee, Dominick Dunne, Lucianne Goldberg and me.




On May 13, 2003, I tried to post the following message but discovered that I had been banned and denied access to Court TV message boards, even though this would have been just one of a handful of messages that I have ever posted:

"I have a question about the psychology of murderers. I have not been able to find any evidence that Scott fits the profile of a murderer, indeed as this webpage clearly suggests, the reverse is evidently true. Is this going to be a problem for the prosecution? Can somebody give me some indication about what it is about the psychology of Scott Peterson, which suggests that he is a murderer?"


Needless to say, the posting privilleges of anybody who raises serious questions on Court TV message boards is revoked, to give the opportunity to slander Scott Peterson, unfettered access. This is not what freedom is all about. Who controls Court TV message boards and why?



 

   

Scott Peterson Trial: Timeline

1/30/03  DIVERTING BLAME
2/21/03 EARLY REPORTS
3/16/03 SUSPICIOUS MINDS
3/21/03  AMBER FREY
4/04/03  MEDIA SPIN
4/10/03  SMOKING GUN?
3/16/03  MARK GERAGOS
5/07/03  TERRORIZING WITNESSES
9/23/03  JAILHOUSE SNITCHES
10/20/03  LARRY KING LIVE TAKEOVER
11/22/03  CONNER PETERSON
01/14/04  CENSORING THE TRUTH
02/06/04  THE REAL SCOOP
02/16/04  VIVIAN MITCHELL DIES
02/18/04  WHO IS FRAMING SCOTT
10/22/04  JURY TAMPERING
CSI  FORENSIC SCIENCE

 

SHOP | Guests | Monica | Hemingway | Murder | Link to us | Hardball | Richard Nixon
 
 

[Messages [Issues & Ideas [FAQs [shop
[Link to us [Education [Home [Email Us

 
 

 
 
A good lawyer knows the law.  A great lawyer knows the judge.
 
NEWSWORLD SHOWDOWN
Copyright 2009
 

 
 
125x125 Hosting & Servers at GoDaddy.com

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
[ Shop | Learn | History | Justice | Law | Tribute | Nixon | Kafka | JFK | Links ]


 
 
Messages