Laci Peterson Autopsy Won't Be Given To The Public

[Jedi Knight]

A judge has ruled that Laci peterson's autopsy won't be allowed to be given to the public (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,88729,00.html). Autopsy information is one of the most important public-domain documents there are.

I expected this because the leftist media and their allies who seek to lynch Scott Peterson for the death of his wife Laci made sure they leaked the part of the autopsy report that said that Laci had carvings in her and the baby had a piece of tape wrapped around its neck. (while the leftist media hinted to the world that Scott was responsible).

The Scott Peterson case proves that the US Constitution has been thrown into the paper shredder and no man is safe from the matriarchal terror apparatus.

JK

[Doubt]

Or maybe the judge wants to make sure the man gets a fair trial before a jury that has not been tainted by exposure to the evidence before hearing the case?

Or is that not possible?

:rolleyes:

[Crossbow]

I am not a lawyer, but I do think that JK is quite incorrect about an autopsy report that is an element of a murder investigation is public domain material and as such it has to be released to the public.

If there are any JREF criminal lawyers would could offer an opinion on this matter, it would be most appreciated.

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by Doubt
Or maybe the judge wants to make sure the man gets a fair trial before a jury that has not been tainted by exposure to the evidence before hearing the case?

Or is that not possible?

:rolleyes:

The autopsy report was already leaked by the prosecution--the parts designed to subvert Scott's trial, that is. You see, here is how it works:

1) Leak information damaging or made to look damaging about the defendent only when the prosecution has no case.

2) Act like you didn't do it and demand damage control (ie. act like you didn't leak the info and then go to the judge and angrily ask for the records to be sealed after the parts you want released are released).

3) Follow-up with sophisticated leftist media attacks on the defendent after the information leaked has had the chance to penetrate the consciousness of the American public.

It is 4th world corruption.

JK

[Mauler]

Did you actually read the article before you came to your conclusions?

From the article :

Prosecutors had asked last week that the autopsy results be unsealed after extensive news leaks of the autopsy results.

[Pyrrho]

Indeed, Jedi Knight, leaking secret information is capitalism in action, as the persons responsible most likely did it for money. A recent example is the publication by the AP of excerpts of Hillary Clinton's fiction novel.

I would say that the media should remember that Scott Peterson is entitled to a fair trial, and that publishing such information, even if it's been leaked, interferes with his civil rights. We saw similar behavior when the alleged kidnappers of Elizabeth Smart were arrested.

[peptoabysmal]

Er....

I thought the leak came from the defense lawyer and was intended to introduce doubt concerning the possibility of Lacy being murdered by a Satanic cult? (i.e. Plastic tape found around the baby's neck etc.)

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by peptoabysmal
Er....

I thought the leak came from the defense lawyer and was intended to introduce doubt concerning the possibility of Lacy being murdered by a Satanic cult? (i.e. Plastic tape found around the baby's neck etc.)

OK, this interests me. My question is this--the autopsy leak-quote also stated at the same time that the tape around the neck of the baby could have been caused by debris floating in the channel from the water current.

That places the leak squarely back in the prosecution's lap because it seems to me that they were concerned about the Satanic Cult speculation and wanted the autopsy report leaked so the "tape" could be explained as channel debris.

I am not saying Scott is innocent--but if I took all the information presented sofar as given by the media and didn't think critically, Peterson would already be found guilty without a trial. That is what is disconcerting about this.

JK

[crackmonkey]

Give it a rest, already. This crime and its prosecution has nothing to do with any political ideology.
Not everything is a product of political persuasion...

[Mauler]

My question is this--the autopsy leak-quote also stated at the same time that the tape around the neck of the baby could have been caused by debris floating in the channel from the water current.

That's not a question.

That places the leak squarely back in the prosecution's lap because it seems to me that they were concerned about the Satanic Cult speculation and wanted the autopsy report leaked so the "tape" could be explained as channel debris.

The leaked information was about cuts to Lacy and tape around the child. The defense leaked the information to show it was those vile Satanist. The media pontificated that it could have been post mortim. There is no reason for the prosecution to be leaking vague details since they are easily winning the battle of public opinion.

but if I took all the information presented sofar as given by the media and didn't think critically,

Judgining by what you are presenting here, you are 0 for 2 on that.

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by Mauler
There is no reason for the prosecution to be leaking vague details since they are easily winning the battle of public opinion.

You mean they have successfully subverted Scott's right to due process.

JK

[Gem]

You mean they have successfully subverted Scott's right to due process.

How does public opinion matter for a judge?

Gem

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by Gem


How does public opinion matter for a judge?

Gem

Judges don't matter--the juries do. When the juries have images of guilt hammered into them 24/7 for months before a man's trial, does the man have access an impartial jury? (you know, the people that could send him to the electric chair).

JK

[Mauler]

You mean they have successfully subverted Scott's right to due process.

Last I checked he is still getting plenty of due process. You care to define what you mean by due process?

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by Mauler


Last I checked he is still getting plenty of due process. You care to define what you mean by due process?

Amendment XIV:

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Section 2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several states according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each state, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the executive and judicial officers of a state, or the members of the legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such state, , and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such state.

Section 3. No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any state, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any state legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any state, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

Section 4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any state shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.

Section 5. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

JK

[Mauler]

I wasn't doubting your abilites to copy and paste, I asked what you defined as due process. If you noticed when you read it there was no definition of due process given, just that it was not to be denied. Again I ask, what is your definition of due process?

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by Mauler
I wasn't doubting your abilites to copy and paste, I asked what you defined as due process. If you noticed when you read it there was no definition of due process given, just that it was not to be denied. Again I ask, what is your definition of due process?

Oh, you want me to take it down for you. No problem. It is quite simple, actually.

Due process is where a defendant is tried in court, not in the leftist media.

JK

[Bjorn]

Originally posted by Jedi Knight
Due process is where a defendant is tried in court, not in the leftist media.

JK Sure. Just like this, from another thread?:

If she was innocent, why was she communicating with the other monsters minutes before they all killed the kid, and why did they tell police she led the guy to the ambush? Seems to me she is guilty until proven innocent in your eyes ... :rolleyes:

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by Bjorn
Sure. Just like this, from another thread?:

Seems to me she is guilty until proven innocent in your eyes ... :rolleyes:

The kids confessed to the crime. What isn't there to believe they are guilty?

Oh wait, do you mean after they spend a week or two in jail with bubba, they will change their minds and say they are innocent?

I can see the leftist logic now, especially from the parents. It is like abortion logic. "Don't worry honey, it was just a mistake. We'll get that non-human vacuumed out of you Monday at 9 AM. Now don't you worry and get all upset over nothing. Go out with your friends this weekend and have a great time. Everything will be just fine. Just leave everything to mommy."

Sure is hard to convince the police that premeditated capital murder is a "mistake" though, huh.

JK

[Bjorn]

Originally posted by Jedi Knight


The kids confessed to the crime. What isn't there to believe they are guilty?

Oh wait, do you mean after they spend a week or two in jail with bubba, they will change their minds and say they are innocent?

I can see the leftist logic now, especially from the parents. It is like abortion logic. "Don't worry honey, it was just a mistake. We'll get that non-human vacuumed out of you Monday at 9 AM. Now don't you worry and get all upset over nothing. Go out with your friends this weekend and have a great time. Everything will be just fine. Just leave everything to mommy."

Sure is hard to convince the police that premeditated capital murder is a "mistake" though, huh.

JK Well, your rants about abortion belongs in another thread.

How about this quote once again:

Due process is where a defendant is tried in court, not in the leftist media. I like that one, and suggest we stick to it even when we don't like the one who is accused of something. Maybe especially then. :p

[Mauler]

Due process is where a defendant is tried in court, not in the leftist media.

Since they are not mutually exclusive, he is not being denied due process by the media pontificating on the released evidence. The only other option is to control what people say or think pre-trial, which is not only impossible it's also unconstitutional. Is it only ok when then "US Constitution has been thrown into the paper shredder" if it's done on your terms?

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by Mauler


Since they are not mutually exclusive, he is not being denied due process by the media pontificating on the released evidence. The only other option is to control what people say or think pre-trial, which is not only impossible it's also unconstitutional. Is it only ok when then "US Constitution has been thrown into the paper shredder" if it's done on your terms?

Welcome to the forum.

The problem with media involvement in 'leaked' sensitive information is that when the media does that they are shredding the US Constitution.

Criminal charges should be brought against anyone that leaks information related to a criminal case that causes an American citizen to lose their right to due process.

Peterson's rights were violated by the leaks. You don't know, nor do I, what the facts are--what actually happened to Laci.

They have a guy in custody--the husband--but they have no evidence Scott killed her and he hasn't confessed.

It is un-American to try a person in the press. Sure, it would be a sensational story to say: "Husband carves up pregnant wife and dumps her into the ocean", but what if the 'husband' didn't do it? The media is using their psychic powers to try and convince everyone in the United States (and globally) that he did.

A chick dies and it just has to be the "husband's" fault, right?

Considering the power of the leftist media to access virtually every home in the United States, how can an accused that the media zeroes in on ever get due process? When the jury pool on a global scale has been contaminated with psychic predictions and other mysticism via the media, will Scott get his fair trial?

The last time I read the US Constitution, there was nothing in there that said the 4th Amendment recognized psychic media activity as fact, nor is there a right to lynch people. If lynching is cool and fashionable now, then let 'the people' know. The law-abiding in this country have been so victimized by criminals that lynching would probably turn into a popular sport. It wouldn't be American, but hey, the media is doing it.

JK

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by Bjorn
Well, your rants about abortion belongs in another thread.

How about this quote once again:

I like that one, and suggest we stick to it even when we don't like the one who is accused of something. Maybe especially then. :p

If there is a confession there is an acknowledgement of guilt. I thought I already covered that for you.

JK

[subgenius]

"A chick dies and it just has to be the "husband's" fault, right?"

And if he did do it he was driven to it by Matriarchal Totalitarianism anyway.

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by subgenius
"A chick dies and it just has to be the "husband's" fault, right?"

And if he did do it he was driven to it by Matriarchal Totalitarianism anyway.

In this case, based upon the evidence I have seen so far and from the leaks, that doesn't appear to be the case. Laci appears to be a normal heterosexual female that was carrying his child. There is no hint of matriarchal totalitarianism there.

Now, if the child is not Scott's and Laci was having an affair, then that would be a motive for Scott to carve her up. What I want to know is if the baby is Scott's baby. The leftist media isn't smart enough to ask that question (or won't to protect the matriarchal-mantle of innocence regarding Laci).

JK

[subgenius]

"...matriarchal-mantle of innocence regarding Laci"

Oh yeah, I forgot, all female murder victims are presumed guilty.

[Hazelip]

Originally posted by Crossbow
I am not a lawyer, but I do think that JK is quite incorrect about an autopsy report that is an element of a murder investigation is public domain material and as such it has to be released to the public.

If there are any JREF criminal lawyers would could offer an opinion on this matter, it would be most appreciated.

Not here in Florida anymore. Not since the celebrity legislation in the aftermath of the death of Dale Earnhardt.

Some guy, makes a living driving in a circle, and you'd think he was the second coming. :rolleyes:

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by Hazelip


Not here in Florida anymore. Not since the celebrity legislation in the aftermath of the death of Dale Earnhardt.

Some guy, makes a living driving in a circle, and you'd think he was the second coming. :rolleyes:

That was over the photographs, not the print data. I don't care if they withhold the photographs--that is not a problem. However, if there are leaks to lynch a man before his trial regarding autopsy print data then make it public.

JK

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by subgenius
"...matriarchal-mantle of innocence regarding Laci"

Oh yeah, I forgot, all female murder victims are presumed guilty.

In your mind.

JK

[The Fool]

Originally posted by Jedi Knight


The kids confessed to the crime. What isn't there to believe they are guilty?


JK

In a thread specifically about this other murder you have already admitted that you manufactured this "confession" story. And here you are a couple of hours later, peddling the same lie in another thread. You really have no limits do you....Goebells would have been proud.

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by The Fool


In a thread specifically about this other murder you have already admitted that you manufactured this "confession" story. And here you are a couple of hours later, peddling the same lie in another thread. You really have no limits do you....Goebells would have been proud.

Goebells was a rookie compared to the Jedi Psyops Detachment.

JK

[Bjorn]

Originally posted by Jedi Knight


If there is a confession there is an acknowledgement of guilt. I thought I already covered that for you.

JK Hehe.

1. Even those who confess have a right to a fair trial.

2. Many confessions have been proven to be wrong.

3. You invented this confession in the first place and even admitted it.

What a shame it would be if your attitude represented the US legal system.

[Mauler]

The problem with media involvement in 'leaked' sensitive information is that when the media does that they are shredding the US Constitution.

So you would shred the first amendment for the percieved infringements of another.

Criminal charges should be brought against anyone that leaks information related to a criminal case that causes an American citizen to lose their right to due process.

He hasn't lost his due process as he is still getting a trial by a jury of his peers. Just because the media and others like you are discussing it doesn't prevent him from getting a trial.

Peterson's rights were violated by the leaks.

You've yet to show which rights have been violated. It's not due process since he is still undergoing the process. Unless something has changed in the last 48 hours he is still having his day in court.

You don't know, nor do I, what the facts are--what actually happened to Laci.

The facts will come out when, of amazing coincidence, when he is getting his due process rights of a trial.

They have a guy in custody--the husband--but they have no evidence Scott killed her and he hasn't confessed.

What happened to your last claim that we don't know the facts? If we don't know the facts then we can't know what evidence they do and do not have.

So we will get one of those due process rights called a trial in which the government will make their case and the defense respond as they feel they need.

It is un-American to try a person in the press.

Utter nonsense. First of all, discussing whatever or whoever in the press is one of the most American things. From the printing of the Boston Massacre to now, the free press is a cornerstone of American life.

Second of all his trial isn't taking place in the press, it's in a court of law. His due process rights are unaffected by any discussion outside the courtroom.

chick dies and it just has to be the "husband's" fault, right?

An overly simplistic question gets an overly simplistic answer : Yes.

Considering the power of the leftist media to access virtually every home in the United States, how can an accused that the media zeroes in on ever get due process? When the jury pool on a global scale has been contaminated with psychic predictions and other mysticism via the media, will Scott get his fair trial?

1 - The only power the press has is the one the viewer grants them.
2 - Due process is unaffected by the media.
3 - Any crime of sufficent noteriety would become unpunishable if we were to use your standards. Good thing we don't.

By your standards we would be forbidden to discuss this case because it would violate your definiton of due process. That would shred one section of the Constitution for another.

The last time I read the US Constitution, there was nothing in there that said the 4th Amendment recognized psychic media activity as fact, nor is there a right to lynch people. If lynching is cool and fashionable now, then let 'the people' know. The law-abiding in this country have been so victimized by criminals that lynching would probably turn into a popular sport. It wouldn't be American, but hey, the media is doing it.

Since Scott Peterson is alive and well inside his cell he hasn't been lynched beyond what you would consider a verbal one. The Constitution does give the media, and you and I for that matter, permission to verbally lynch someone. It's that thing about free speach if you care to look it up.

[subgenius]

The only difference in the two cases is the genders of the alleged perpetrators and victims.


"Goebells was a rookie compared to the Jedi Psyops Detachment."

[subgenius]

"8th grade girls today arrange ambushes of 16 year old men for their paychecks from the boy's father to kill them and then go buy crack cocaine, ecstacy, heroin and crystal meth.

Then the 8th grade girls go have sex with dozens of partners after they enter their drug-induced state from the narcotic ingestion and then coerce other young men to assist them in killing/robbing other victims.
JK 06/07/03"

Men are coerced by 8th grade girls. Only the benighted one is strong enough to withstand the pressure.
But for how long?

[peptoabysmal]

Originally posted by Jedi Knight


OK, this interests me. My question is this--the autopsy leak-quote also stated at the same time that the tape around the neck of the baby could have been caused by debris floating in the channel from the water current.

That places the leak squarely back in the prosecution's lap because it seems to me that they were concerned about the Satanic Cult speculation and wanted the autopsy report leaked so the "tape" could be explained as channel debris.

I am not saying Scott is innocent--but if I took all the information presented sofar as given by the media and didn't think critically, Peterson would already be found guilty without a trial. That is what is disconcerting about this.

JK

The way I understood it was that the defense first leaked a portion of the autopsy report. It was speculated that this was done to raise doubt concerning the possibility of a Satanic Cult. The Prosecution then wanted the entire autopsy report released to the public (by dropping their objection to having the autopsy report released to the public).

As much as is shouldn't be this way, a high media profile case like this adds an extra dimension to the case that both the defense and prosecution are compelled to try to use the media to their advantage.

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by Mauler
So you would shred the first amendment for the percieved infringements of another.

No, when the media is used to convince populations that a man is responsible for a crime there is no evidence he committed, that is not ethical 1st Amendment activity.

He hasn't lost his due process as he is still getting a trial by a jury of his peers. Just because the media and others like you are discussing it doesn't prevent him from getting a trial.

No, the trial is subverted because critical evidence to his defense was looted from his house and key facts that he may not have anything to with were leaked to the media to have the media lay blame upon him. These things are done to contaminate jury trials.

You've yet to show which rights have been violated. It's not due process since he is still undergoing the process. Unless something has changed in the last 48 hours he is still having his day in court.

His right to due process is being violated. I already explained that but you aren't intelligent enough to see it.

The facts will come out when, of amazing coincidence, when he is getting his due process rights of a trial.

The facts are coming out now, the exception being that the media is linking him to the crime when he may not have committed it.

What happened to your last claim that we don't know the facts? If we don't know the facts then we can't know what evidence they do and do not have.

We don't know all the facts. That is why the facts should only be introduced in court, not just the ones to attack him because he is the husband and therefore should be convicted in the media. That happens in 4th world countries.

So we will get one of those due process rights called a trial in which the government will make their case and the defense respond as they feel they need.

The defense deserves equal time in the leftist media to defend their client if the media is going to subvert the man's trial.

Utter nonsense. First of all, discussing whatever or whoever in the press is one of the most American things. From the printing of the Boston Massacre to now, the free press is a cornerstone of American life.

Only in tabloid press outlets that have no credibility or professional ethic.

Second of all his trial isn't taking place in the press, it's in a court of law. His due process rights are unaffected by any discussion outside the courtroom.

Reading comprehension problem?

An overly simplistic question gets an overly simplistic answer : Yes.

Public school educated?

1 - The only power the press has is the one the viewer grants them.

Oh really? Then why does government license those venues? You really don't know what you are talking about. Tell me you are not someone's sock-puppet. Well, now I understand why you probably are lol.

2 - Due process is unaffected by the media.

Ever hear of Richard Jewel? Missed that example, huh.

3 - Any crime of sufficent noteriety would become unpunishable if we were to use your standards. Good thing we don't.

True, but if a man is not convicted of a crime and does not confess to a crime, he is innocent until proven guilty. The leftist media has no business trying any American of guilt/innocence.

By your standards we would be forbidden to discuss this case because it would violate your definiton of due process. That would shred one section of the Constitution for another.

No, it would follow the spirit of the Constitution. You know, a man will not be deprived of 'life, liberty or property" without due process. If there is no evidence a man committed a crime, and yet the leftist media contaminates the jury into thinking he did, is that due process? No, that is 4th world activity. I already explained that to you several times.

Since Scott Peterson is alive and well inside his cell he hasn't been lynched beyond what you would consider a verbal one. The Constitution does give the media, and you and I for that matter, permission to verbally lynch someone. It's that thing about free speach if you care to look it up.

That is a sophomoric statement unworthy of a response. The only thing you are showing me, Mauler, is that your intellect is 'mauled'.

JK

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by peptoabysmal


The way I understood it was that the defense first leaked a portion of the autopsy report. It was speculated that this was done to raise doubt concerning the possibility of a Satanic Cult. The Prosecution then wanted the entire autopsy report released to the public (by dropping their objection to having the autopsy report released to the public).

As much as is shouldn't be this way, a high media profile case like this adds an extra dimension to the case that both the defense and prosecution are compelled to try to use the media to their advantage.

There has been so much misinformation about the Peterson case that the lines between fact/fiction are blurred now. That is why Scott won't get a fair trial.

Here is what happened.

1) The defense announced they were conducting their own criminal investigation based upon the case evidence. Their reasoning was that they believed they had evidence of a 'Satanic Ritual' (like you said) and they mentioned several potential witnesses who may know the real killers. The defense did not leak any details of the autopsy specifically, only that they had formed a theory Laci was killed by Satanist(s).

2) Almost immediately thereafter, the defense announced they were going to film the inside of Scott Peterson's home to aid in his defense since his home was still classified as a "crime scene" by the prosecution and the theoried location of her murder. The defense took that as the prosecution's opinion of where Laci was murdered, so the defense had the right to gather evidence at that location in a preserved crime scene setting.

3) Then specific details of the autopsy report were leaked, specifically ones that said the baby had tape around its neck and Laci had damage to her body. The leftist media took that and invited unqualified talking heads to comment on it (naturally against Scott in every way) 24/7 for days afterwards. The defense was given no such media access to refute claims made by the self-appointed so-called 'experts' debating the evidence. That is an ethical disgrace.

4) Scott Peterson's home, still a crime scene, is plundered by criminal felon burglars while the police look on and while the leftist media filmed it. This had two purposes. The first was to irretrievably contaminate the crime scene so the defense could not film it for Scott's defense, and give the leftist media yet another lump of coal to brainwash the public that Scott 'had items' that were 'not his property'. It was made out to be a situation where Scott was holding stolen property, when in fact all the property in the house belonged to Scott. This was done to add yet another layer of perceived "guilt" upon Scott.

Contrary to media reports, Scott gave no permission to anyone to enter it and neither did his attorneys. No sitting judge gave written permission. The DA is not authorized to allow anyone to go into Scott's home to steal personal property belonging to Scott. (even if it was claimed to be Laci's). If the items were not evidence to be used at trial, and if Laci did not specifically itemize what items she wanted to go where in a will, it is Scott's property.

Now ethically it would be a good thing for Scott to give Laci's mom mementos, etc, and I think he arranged to do that after the defense got a chance to film the house for his defense.

I am confident those facts will come out in pre-trial hearings and during the actual formal trial extensively.

JK

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by subgenius
"8th grade girls today arrange ambushes of 16 year old men for their paychecks from the boy's father to kill them and then go buy crack cocaine, ecstacy, heroin and crystal meth.

Then the 8th grade girls go have sex with dozens of partners after they enter their drug-induced state from the narcotic ingestion and then coerce other young men to assist them in killing/robbing other victims.
JK 06/07/03"

Men are coerced by 8th grade girls. Only the benighted one is strong enough to withstand the pressure.
But for how long?

This conversation is for grown-ups. Run along and go play wiith your Legos.

JK

[subgenius]

Originally posted by Jedi Knight


This conversation is for grown-ups. Run along and go play wiith your Legos.

JK
Hard to stomach your own words isn't it? Imagine how we feel.
P.S. Remember criticizing that woman for her spelling? "Judge not, lest thy be judged." ("wiith") Great being holier than thou isn't it?
How was Mother's Day?
Are all 8th grade girls having multiple sexual partners? Do all married women have dozens of sexual partners?
(All statements you have made)

"Goebells was a rookie compared to the Jedi Psyops Detachment.
JK 06/08/03"

"Women have dozens of sexual partners per week being married and no one bitches about that until a chick comes up missing and then her husband is a "bad guy" because he had an "affair"....whoop dee doo.

JK
05/01/03"

"I should get paid big $$$$$ for my genius analysis of these cases.—JK 05/01/03"

So why aren't you? Is it the big bad mommies that are plotting against you? They are powerful, aren't they?

[Mauler]

No, when the media is used to convince populations that a man is responsible for a crime there is no evidence he committed, that is not ethical 1st Amendment activity.

You said that you don't know the evidence so how can you claim that there is no evidence that he didn't do it? So it's acceptable for you use your physic powers to know what the evidence is but the media can't?

The media being used to convince people of any set of facts, true or not, is exactly the intent of the framers.

No, the trial is subverted because critical evidence to his defense was looted from his house and key facts that he may not have anything to with were leaked to the media to have the media lay blame upon him. These things are done to contaminate jury trials.

The media didn't "loot" his house so it can't be used to show that they are responsible for a loss of rights. The rest is just the speculation you claim is the mark of being a leftist press agent.

His right to due process is being violated. I already explained that but you aren't intelligent enough to see it.

Just because you explained what you think due process is doesn't make you correct. Due process is simply the mechanics of the police and court systems. A jury hasn't been polled yet and it's still possible to find 12 men and women who can fairly judge him based on the evidence given in court. Simple speculation in the media and other groups isn't a violation of due process.

The facts are coming out now, the exception being that the media is linking him to the crime when he may not have committed it.

The facts aren't coming out now, or have you stopped reading your own posts? The autopsy isn't being released. You said you don't know the facts so you can't say there is evidence that he didn't do it while condemming those who claim there is evidence that he did do it.

Ever hear of Richard Jewel? Missed that example, huh.

Last I checked he was given due process, and based on the evidence, wasn't convicted. That is due process. I didn't miss the example, you did.

True, but if a man is not convicted of a crime and does not confess to a crime, he is innocent until proven guilty. The leftist media has no business trying any American of guilt/innocence.

But you do? You've been claiming based on the same non-evidence that he didn't do it. The rights you keep for your self are the same ones the media is using. They are both the proper use of those rights.

No, it would follow the spirit of the Constitution. You know, a man will not be deprived of 'life, liberty or property" without due process. If there is no evidence a man committed a crime, and yet the leftist media contaminates the jury into thinking he did, is that due process? No, that is 4th world activity. I already explained that to you several times.

He hasn't been denied life, liberty of property by the government without due process. Every explaination you give about due process is wrong no matter how many times you repeat it.

[Crossbow]

Jedi Knight, once again, I see that you are arguing against your own issue.

If you want the autopsy report to be released to the public,
then you do not have to worry because this has already been done via the leaks to the media.

If you want the autopsy report to remain confidential until the trial,
then you should not be asking for this report to be released to the public.

So please clarify: do you want, or do you not want, the Peterson autopsy report to be released to the public?

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by Crossbow
Jedi Knight, once again, I see that you are arguing against your own issue.

If you want the autopsy report to be released to the public,
then you do not have to worry because this has already been done via the leaks to the media.

If you want the autopsy report to remain confidential until the trial,
then you should not be asking for this report to be released to the public.

So please clarify: do you want, or do you not want, the Peterson autopsy report to be released to the public?

You deliberately misread what I said. (nothing new there).

All I am saying is that if you have agents of the prosecution leaking autopsy information favoring the prosecution, then release the whole file to balance the subversion of the defendent's trial and due process.

JK

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by subgenius

Hard to stomach your own words isn't it? Imagine how we feel.
P.S. Remember criticizing that woman for her spelling? "Judge not, lest thy be judged." ("wiith") Great being holier than thou isn't it?
How was Mother's Day?
Are all 8th grade girls having multiple sexual partners? Do all married women have dozens of sexual partners?
(All statements you have made)

"Goebells was a rookie compared to the Jedi Psyops Detachment.
JK 06/08/03"

"Women have dozens of sexual partners per week being married and no one bitches about that until a chick comes up missing and then her husband is a "bad guy" because he had an "affair"....whoop dee doo.

JK
05/01/03"

"I should get paid big $$$$$ for my genius analysis of these cases.—JK 05/01/03"

So why aren't you? Is it the big bad mommies that are plotting against you? They are powerful, aren't they?



I am just not into debating with a minor intellect like you anymore. You're not even funny. Look, I know you don't like me and you never provide any information worthy of intellectual consideration.

That is why I told you to go play with your Legos. It is more your speed.

JK

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by Mauler
You said that you don't know the evidence so how can you claim that there is no evidence that he didn't do it? So it's acceptable for you use your physic powers to know what the evidence is but the media can't?

The 'evidence' given to the public is a distorted series of facts derived from leftist media outlets.

The media being used to convince people of any set of facts, true or not, is exactly the intent of the framers.

Not in an undemocractic venue. Would the founders accept the media promoting monarchy after the revolution? I don't think so. What about Nazism (fascism)? That is the level of authoritarianism in information dissemination in the United States now via the media, but it is more Sovietesque than National Socialist.

The media didn't "loot" his house so it can't be used to show that they are responsible for a loss of rights. The rest is just the speculation you claim is the mark of being a leftist press agent.

No, the media didn't inform the unsuspecting public that what was happening was a crime. The media also didn't interview police officers there at the scene live asking them why they were not apprehending the dangerous criminal felons that entered Scott's house and stole his property and contaminated the crime scene.

Just because you explained what you think due process is doesn't make you correct. Due process is simply the mechanics of the police and court systems. A jury hasn't been polled yet and it's still possible to find 12 men and women who can fairly judge him based on the evidence given in court. Simple speculation in the media and other groups isn't a violation of due process.

It will be nearly impossible to find an impartial jury with the media contamination of the case. Also, due process are those things that happen in connection with the courts, not the media. Again, and as usual, you are wrong.

The facts aren't coming out now, or have you stopped reading your own posts? The autopsy isn't being released. You said you don't know the facts so you can't say there is evidence that he didn't do it while condemming those who claim there is evidence that he did do it.

Facts did come out via the autopsy as guided by the prosecution. We covered this already.

Last I checked he was given due process, and based on the evidence, wasn't convicted. That is due process. I didn't miss the example, you did.

See above. Repeating the same lie doesn't make it true. Also, reread the previous post I made to you about the matter. You are in denial. Leftist perhaps?

But you do? You've been claiming based on the same non-evidence that he didn't do it. The rights you keep for your self are the same ones the media is using. They are both the proper use of those rights.

No, when the media releases confidential information that interferes with pre-trial and trial defense of a defendent, that is a crime. Can a reporter interfere with a criminal investigation and claim 1st Amendment protection? No way. The 1st Amendment is not a venue to get away with committing crimes in the United States.

He hasn't been denied life, liberty of property by the government without due process. Every explaination you give about due process is wrong no matter how many times you repeat it.

Sure he is. The only thing that matters is the outcome. If people are committing criminal acts to send an innocent man to jail, is that due process? Hell no. Get a clue.

Seriously, do you have any non-sophomoric information to provide or do you relish in explaining away constitutional rights via fascism?

JK

[Dancing David]

Are you sure the judge sealed the record to keep the lefist media happy? Where is the connection there?

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by Dancing David
Are you sure the judge sealed the record to keep the lefist media happy? Where is the connection there?

The judge sealed the autopsy report after the leftist media took parts of it to spin against Scott. Why wouldn't the leftist media be happy that happened?

JK

[Dancing David]

I thought it was his lawyers that released the info, not the lefist media, say is the Manchester Guardian actually covering the case?

They just want to stir up the satanism thing.

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by Dancing David
I thought it was his lawyers that released the info, not the lefist media, say is the Manchester Guardian actually covering the case?

They just want to stir up the satanism thing.

I already explained that in a post above. Scroll back.

JK

[Mauler]

All I am saying is that if you have agents of the prosecution leaking autopsy information favoring the prosecution, then release the whole file to balance the subversion of the defendent's trial and due process.

First problem is that it wasn't the prosocution who leaked the autopsy, it was the defense. It was the state who wanted to release the full autopsy according to your own link.

Second problem is that even if they did release all the details it wouldn't stop the media, or anyone else for that matter, to grabbing the fact they like and running with them. This would still violate your incorrect definition of due process.


The 'evidence' given to the public is a distorted series of facts derived from leftist media outlets.

I thought the distorted view of the facts was coming from the prosocution and not the media?

Not in an undemocractic venue. Would the founders accept the media promoting monarchy after the revolution? I don't think so. What about Nazism (fascism)? That is the level of authoritarianism in information dissemination in the United States now via the media, but it is more Sovietesque than National Socialist.

They made no attempts to squelch the discussion of an American monarchy. In fact just the opposite. They discussed and dismissed the notion and put in place methods to prevent both a president - monarch and having direct elections of the president.


It will be nearly impossible to find an impartial jury with the media contamination of the case. Also, due process are those things that happen in connection with the courts, not the media.

Impartial doesn't mean uninformed. It's possible to get an impossible jury in any case, even with one with this much pub. Also? I said due process was the mechanics of the court. Due process isn't having a jury that hasn't heard a single fact about the case. The reason for that is because trials are public. The only way to get what you are after is to have secret trials and the abolishment of free speach.

Facts did come out via the autopsy as guided by the prosecution. We covered this already.

Wrong guide. You can't claim that everyone doesn't know the facts and that you know that there is no evidence proving his guilt. They are mutually exclusive statements.

No, when the media releases confidential information that interferes with pre-trial and trial defense of a defendent, that is a crime

They didn't release anything for they had nothing to release. The crime, if there was one, is in who reported it to the media who works for the defendant.

Can a reporter interfere with a criminal investigation and claim 1st Amendment protection? No way. The 1st Amendment is not a venue to get away with committing crimes in the United States.

No reporter has interfered with the investigation so it's a moot point. Speculation isn't interference.

Sure he is. The only thing that matters is the outcome. If people are committing criminal acts to send an innocent man to jail, is that due process? Hell no. Get a clue.

You admitted you don't know the facts so you can't say that he is innocent. The state hasn't violated his due process rights even if you are right about the media.

[subgenius]

Yeah but he's right because he's smarter than you.

[peptoabysmal]

Originally posted by Jedi Knight

...
4) Scott Peterson's home, still a crime scene, is plundered by criminal felon burglars while the police look on and while the leftist media filmed it. This had two purposes. The first was to irretrievably contaminate the crime scene so the defense could not film it for Scott's defense, and give the leftist media yet another lump of coal to brainwash the public that Scott 'had items' that were 'not his property'. It was made out to be a situation where Scott was holding stolen property, when in fact all the property in the house belonged to Scott. This was done to add yet another layer of perceived "guilt" upon Scott.
...
JK

*nod*

This part of it really bothered me too.

[Mauler]

No, when the media is used to convince populations that a man is responsible for a crime there is no evidence he committed, that is not ethical 1st Amendment activity.

You said that you don't know the evidence so how can you claim that there is no evidence that he didn't do it? So it's acceptable for you use your physic powers to know what the evidence is but the media can't?

The media being used to convince people of any set of facts, true or not, is exactly the intent of the framers.

No, the trial is subverted because critical evidence to his defense was looted from his house and key facts that he may not have anything to with were leaked to the media to have the media lay blame upon him. These things are done to contaminate jury trials.

The media didn't "loot" his house so it can't be used to show that they are responsible for a loss of rights. The rest is just the speculation you claim is the mark of being a leftist press agent.

His right to due process is being violated. I already explained that but you aren't intelligent enough to see it.

Just because you explained what you think due process is doesn't make you correct. Due process is simply the mechanics of the police and court systems. A jury hasn't been polled yet and it's still possible to find 12 men and women who can fairly judge him based on the evidence given in court. Simple speculation in the media and other groups isn't a violation of due process.

The facts are coming out now, the exception being that the media is linking him to the crime when he may not have committed it.

The facts aren't coming out now, or have you stopped reading your own posts? The autopsy isn't being released. You said you don't know the facts so you can't say there is evidence that he didn't do it while condemming those who claim there is evidence that he did do it.

Ever hear of Richard Jewel? Missed that example, huh.

Last I checked he was given due process, and based on the evidence, wasn't convicted. That is due process. I didn't miss the example, you did.

True, but if a man is not convicted of a crime and does not confess to a crime, he is innocent until proven guilty. The leftist media has no business trying any American of guilt/innocence.

But you do? You've been claiming based on the same non-evidence that he didn't do it. The rights you keep for your self are the same ones the media is using. They are both the proper use of those rights.

No, it would follow the spirit of the Constitution. You know, a man will not be deprived of 'life, liberty or property" without due process. If there is no evidence a man committed a crime, and yet the leftist media contaminates the jury into thinking he did, is that due process? No, that is 4th world activity. I already explained that to you several times.

He hasn't been denied life, liberty of property by the government without due process. Every explaination you give about due process is wrong no matter how many times you repeat it.

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by Mauler


You said that you don't know the evidence so how can you claim that there is no evidence that he didn't do it? So it's acceptable for you use your physic powers to know what the evidence is but the media can't?

The media being used to convince people of any set of facts, true or not, is exactly the intent of the framers.



The media didn't "loot" his house so it can't be used to show that they are responsible for a loss of rights. The rest is just the speculation you claim is the mark of being a leftist press agent.



Just because you explained what you think due process is doesn't make you correct. Due process is simply the mechanics of the police and court systems. A jury hasn't been polled yet and it's still possible to find 12 men and women who can fairly judge him based on the evidence given in court. Simple speculation in the media and other groups isn't a violation of due process.



The facts aren't coming out now, or have you stopped reading your own posts? The autopsy isn't being released. You said you don't know the facts so you can't say there is evidence that he didn't do it while condemming those who claim there is evidence that he did do it.



Last I checked he was given due process, and based on the evidence, wasn't convicted. That is due process. I didn't miss the example, you did.



But you do? You've been claiming based on the same non-evidence that he didn't do it. The rights you keep for your self are the same ones the media is using. They are both the proper use of those rights.



He hasn't been denied life, liberty of property by the government without due process. Every explaination you give about due process is wrong no matter how many times you repeat it.

That is nonsense.

JK

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by peptoabysmal
*nod*

This part of it really bothered me too.

Agreed. The things happening in Scott's trial are like the movie "Training Day."

JK

[Bjorn]

Originally posted by Jedi Knight


Agreed. The things happening in Scott's trial are like the movie "Training Day."

JK Sorry - I must have missed something here: When did the trial start? :confused:

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by Bjorn
Sorry - I must have missed something here: When did the trial start? :confused:

Pre-trial, formal trial, discovery--it is all the same animal.

JK

[Bjorn]

Originally posted by Jedi Knight


Pre-trial, formal trial, discovery--it is all the same animal.

JK Oh - I'm not educated about the US court system. So the trial has started?

I thought the prosecutor and defense lawyers had a while now to prepare the case, to research the evidence, so to speak, and then meet in court. Was I wrong? :confused:

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by Bjorn
Oh - I'm not educated about the US court system. So the trial has started?

I thought the prosecutor and defense lawyers had a while now to prepare the case, to research the evidence, so to speak, and then meet in court. Was I wrong? :confused:

Yeah, that is called 'pretrial discovery'. The prosecution and the defense get to look at the evidence to see what both sides are going to try and prove, then it goes to jury selection and then the trial.

Right now the defense is conducting its own criminal investigation so the case is still open.

I watch Matlock lol.

JK

[Bjorn]

Originally posted by Jedi Knight


Yeah, that is called 'pretrial discovery'. The prosecution and the defense get to look at the evidence to see what both sides are going to try and prove, then it goes to jury selection and then the trial.

Right now the defense is conducting its own criminal investigation so the case is still open.

I watch Matlock lol.

JK So the trial hasn't started. Why post:

The things happening in Scott's trial are like .... Just pulling a Jedi? :p

[subgenius]

"Women have dozens of sexual partners per week being married and no one bitches about that until a chick comes up missing and then her husband is a "bad guy" because he had an "affair"....whoop dee doo.
JK
05/01/03"

The victim:

[Mauler]

Oh - I'm not educated about the US court system. So the trial has started?

As explained to me by a few lawyers during some research on an unrelated subject, the criminal system, in shorthand, after the crime has been observed or warrents issued :

1 - Arrest. Handcuffs and some time behind bars.
2 - Arraignment. Brought before a judge and charges are first formally presented to the accused. Bail is set.
3 - Discovery. The state must hand over all the relevent information for the defense to wade through. The defense, on the other hand, aren't required to do the same and almost never do. Any evidence discovered after the initial discovery by the state must also be handed over in a timely manner, usually same day or next morning in practice.
4 - Pretrial motions. Usually the Defense trying to exclude bad or illegal evidence and otherwise poking at the evidence. Bail is also challenged.
5 - Voir Dire. The jury selection process. The state and the defendant get to interview potential jury members. They get a limited number of no peremptory challenges and an unlimted number of challenges for cause. You have to explain the cause to the court and it's rare for a judge to not accept the reasoning.
6 - The trial. The parade of witnesses, evidence and other drama dragged into the courtroom.
7 - The verdict. Jury gets to assign guilt and innocence.
8 - Posttrial motions. After the jury is thanked and excused, more lawyering to get the jury set aside along with other manuvers that rarely work but frequently tried.
9 - Sentancing, if necessary. Judge gets to sentance the defendant based upon guilt and guidelines.
10 - Appeals. It's almost always the defendant who appeals since it's virtually impossible for the state to get past double jeapordy.

Right now the Peterson trial is at point #4. What JK has been attempting to say is that pretrial publicity has automatically destroyed #5. While it might be necessary to move the trial it's not an automatic violation of his due process rights when the media discusses his case. I suspect that in the end the trial will be moved because of the local search effort. It's hard to be impartial when you either know someone or were actually involved with the multiple search efforts.

A reasonable breakdown of a fair jury - http://supreme.lp.findlaw.com/constitution/amendment06/05.html

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by Mauler


As explained to me by a few lawyers during some research on an unrelated subject, the criminal system, in shorthand, after the crime has been observed or warrents issued :

1 - Arrest. Handcuffs and some time behind bars.
2 - Arraignment. Brought before a judge and charges are first formally presented to the accused. Bail is set.
3 - Discovery. The state must hand over all the relevent information for the defense to wade through. The defense, on the other hand, aren't required to do the same and almost never do. Any evidence discovered after the initial discovery by the state must also be handed over in a timely manner, usually same day or next morning in practice.
4 - Pretrial motions. Usually the Defense trying to exclude bad or illegal evidence and otherwise poking at the evidence. Bail is also challenged.
5 - Voir Dire. The jury selection process. The state and the defendant get to interview potential jury members. They get a limited number of no peremptory challenges and an unlimted number of challenges for cause. You have to explain the cause to the court and it's rare for a judge to not accept the reasoning.
6 - The trial. The parade of witnesses, evidence and other drama dragged into the courtroom.
7 - The verdict. Jury gets to assign guilt and innocence.
8 - Posttrial motions. After the jury is thanked and excused, more lawyering to get the jury set aside along with other manuvers that rarely work but frequently tried.
9 - Sentancing, if necessary. Judge gets to sentance the defendant based upon guilt and guidelines.
10 - Appeals. It's almost always the defendant who appeals since it's virtually impossible for the state to get past double jeapordy.

Right now the Peterson trial is at point #4. What JK has been attempting to say is that pretrial publicity has automatically destroyed #5. While it might be necessary to move the trial it's not an automatic violation of his due process rights when the media discusses his case. I suspect that in the end the trial will be moved because of the local search effort. It's hard to be impartial when you either know someone or were actually involved with the multiple search efforts.

A reasonable breakdown of a fair jury - http://supreme.lp.findlaw.com/constitution/amendment06/05.html

Thanks for taking the time to list all that out. My only concern is how the media is taking facts potentially out of context and endangering Scott's right to a fair trial.

I want the killer caught and punished. Let's make sure we have the right guy before we go lynching people.

JK