Love you guys! I enjoy hearing you say what I am thinking.
I really dislike Scott but, love this case! I’m wondering if there was more information on previous girlfriends of Scott? You mentioned three and one of whom walked into Scott and Lacis bedroom. What happened after this incident?… I guess I’m just surprised that we haven’t heard from other woman and from maybe someone Lacy confided in regarding these affairs.
I’d love to know more about Scott’s history and behavior prior to meeting Laci and during their relationship, especially pertaining to treatment of the woman.
There is just too many coincidences in this case for me to not see Scott as guilty. He definitely has antisocial behavior, narcissism and appears to fit the definition of a psychopath.
Lastly, I was listening to a podcast called The Kennedys and was fascinated by the death of Marilyn Monroe and how many people seemed to be involved. From my understanding, a lot of evidence and documents have been destroyed but, I was wondering if you ever considered covering her death?
I am absolutely addicted to your amazing podcast.
I followed this case in real time, read all local newspapers and coverage. Mark Geragos provided reasonable doubt in my opinion even though I thought Scott was guilty.
Even on episode 4, I still feel reasonable doubt.
Great coverage.
I was wondering if you might look at the case of State of Texas versus Darlie Routier…this one just doesn’t sit right with me.
Brett, love your southern accent and Alice, I love your laugh.💜💙
You mention that Scott is the one who used the mop and bucket to clean up what-have-you, but it wasn’t blood.
When someone dies, their bladder and/or bowels can and often do release. Did it occur to anyone that that’s what he was cleaning up?
The same thing with the Watts case. He said the girls complained about the smell in the truck. This is gross, but Shannan complained of constipation during pregnancy. Once she died her bowels could have released which may have explained the smell.
hey Y’all … just new to this podcast and really loving it. I’ve been looking for a true crime podcast that primarily discusses the evidence of a case from a legal perspective, not just speculation. Also I had to chuckle at the beginning of this episode because, if your comment about “full … body … chills” is a reference to what I think it is (another true crime podcast “co”-host?) then I 1000% agree! 😀
Keep up the awesome work guys!
Cheers from Australia!
And to put a body conceal it in an aluminum boat….dump in the bay in broad daylight….unlikely. I do think he’s a jerk and gross man but I don’t think the evidence suggests he murdered her. It just doesn’t add up. I’m a crime junkie and it’s just not there. It doesn’t make sense.
Interesting now the Innocence Project is involved – I understand they do not take cases lightly and they normally require some form of solid evidence. Clearly Peterson is a Sociopath – not necessarily a Psycopath …will be watching to see how the new DNA lead pans out.
Late to the party here but found this podcast after the news came out about his request to get new evidence tested + the netflix doc.
To ‘Jessica’s’ points above: 1. the autopsy revealed she never gave birth, dead or otherwise, her cervix was intact. That’s not something that happened so there would have been no evidence of that anywhere, when Connor did finally emerge, it was out of a hole made in her stomach. There may have been some other fluids (not necessarily blood, but the release of the bowels, urine, etc as someone else has mentioned), marks, and evidence from when he dragged her to the door, this is likely why he was mopping. 2. It was a miserable day and the bay was pretty deserted, only 3 people signed in that day. There was also another case where a pregnant woman was dumped in the bay and found in July of that year, her murder had not, nor has it ever been solved (it was likely her boyfriend who was married and didn’t want the baby) – but very likely that Scott had heard about that case and realized that it was a viable option, honestly probably his best chance at getting away with this.
The shoes being in the house, her phone being in her car, her keys and wallet being in the house, all strongly suggest she never went on that walk. She never left that house under her own power. My guess is that he killed her that morning while she was getting dressed, after she’d done her hair. This is why there are so many details from that morning that he can present without issue. It doesn’t take long to smother or strangle someone. I also think that the dog presented a huge problem for him. I have two medium to big sized dogs and they would make it veeeeery difficult for my husband to kill me and get my body out of the house 1. quietly and 2. without jumping all over both him and my body (and any fluids present), spreading evidence everywhere that would be almost impossible to clean up and causing people to notice a disturbance. Plus, if the dog is in the house or backyard and Laci’s car is in the driveway, it’s obvious Laci never left the house and in the absence of evidence of a break-in or abduction (other people’s prints, hair, etc. in the house), the only option is to put the lead on the dog, keep her tied up until you’re ready to go and then let her loose. That way she’s not disturbing the crime scene, the clean up and it suggests she wasn’t at home when she was killed.
I’ll add that in our neighbourhood, dogs are regularly getting out and we know where they belong and put them back in their backyards. The neighbour stated, as far as I’m aware, that she had an appointment she needed to get to, that’s why she was so sure of the time she found the dog (she would have known when the appt was and whether or not she was late, approximately how long it took her to get there, etc), and likely didn’t have time to look around and try to find Laci or Scott but wanted the dog to be safe.
The Prosecutors Podcast 
Love you guys! I enjoy hearing you say what I am thinking.
I really dislike Scott but, love this case! I’m wondering if there was more information on previous girlfriends of Scott? You mentioned three and one of whom walked into Scott and Lacis bedroom. What happened after this incident?… I guess I’m just surprised that we haven’t heard from other woman and from maybe someone Lacy confided in regarding these affairs.
I’d love to know more about Scott’s history and behavior prior to meeting Laci and during their relationship, especially pertaining to treatment of the woman.
There is just too many coincidences in this case for me to not see Scott as guilty. He definitely has antisocial behavior, narcissism and appears to fit the definition of a psychopath.
Lastly, I was listening to a podcast called The Kennedys and was fascinated by the death of Marilyn Monroe and how many people seemed to be involved. From my understanding, a lot of evidence and documents have been destroyed but, I was wondering if you ever considered covering her death?
Thank you!
Kerry
LikeLike
I am absolutely addicted to your amazing podcast.
I followed this case in real time, read all local newspapers and coverage. Mark Geragos provided reasonable doubt in my opinion even though I thought Scott was guilty.
Even on episode 4, I still feel reasonable doubt.
Great coverage.
I was wondering if you might look at the case of State of Texas versus Darlie Routier…this one just doesn’t sit right with me.
Brett, love your southern accent and Alice, I love your laugh.💜💙
LikeLike
You mention that Scott is the one who used the mop and bucket to clean up what-have-you, but it wasn’t blood.
When someone dies, their bladder and/or bowels can and often do release. Did it occur to anyone that that’s what he was cleaning up?
The same thing with the Watts case. He said the girls complained about the smell in the truck. This is gross, but Shannan complained of constipation during pregnancy. Once she died her bowels could have released which may have explained the smell.
Thoughts?
LikeLike
hey Y’all … just new to this podcast and really loving it. I’ve been looking for a true crime podcast that primarily discusses the evidence of a case from a legal perspective, not just speculation. Also I had to chuckle at the beginning of this episode because, if your comment about “full … body … chills” is a reference to what I think it is (another true crime podcast “co”-host?) then I 1000% agree! 😀
Keep up the awesome work guys!
Cheers from Australia!
LikeLike
She would have delivered the baby likely quickly after death….which would be a mess. Which is where lack of evidence makes me believe him.
LikeLike
And to put a body conceal it in an aluminum boat….dump in the bay in broad daylight….unlikely. I do think he’s a jerk and gross man but I don’t think the evidence suggests he murdered her. It just doesn’t add up. I’m a crime junkie and it’s just not there. It doesn’t make sense.
LikeLike
Interesting now the Innocence Project is involved – I understand they do not take cases lightly and they normally require some form of solid evidence. Clearly Peterson is a Sociopath – not necessarily a Psycopath …will be watching to see how the new DNA lead pans out.
LikeLike
Late to the party here but found this podcast after the news came out about his request to get new evidence tested + the netflix doc.
To ‘Jessica’s’ points above: 1. the autopsy revealed she never gave birth, dead or otherwise, her cervix was intact. That’s not something that happened so there would have been no evidence of that anywhere, when Connor did finally emerge, it was out of a hole made in her stomach. There may have been some other fluids (not necessarily blood, but the release of the bowels, urine, etc as someone else has mentioned), marks, and evidence from when he dragged her to the door, this is likely why he was mopping. 2. It was a miserable day and the bay was pretty deserted, only 3 people signed in that day. There was also another case where a pregnant woman was dumped in the bay and found in July of that year, her murder had not, nor has it ever been solved (it was likely her boyfriend who was married and didn’t want the baby) – but very likely that Scott had heard about that case and realized that it was a viable option, honestly probably his best chance at getting away with this.
The shoes being in the house, her phone being in her car, her keys and wallet being in the house, all strongly suggest she never went on that walk. She never left that house under her own power. My guess is that he killed her that morning while she was getting dressed, after she’d done her hair. This is why there are so many details from that morning that he can present without issue. It doesn’t take long to smother or strangle someone. I also think that the dog presented a huge problem for him. I have two medium to big sized dogs and they would make it veeeeery difficult for my husband to kill me and get my body out of the house 1. quietly and 2. without jumping all over both him and my body (and any fluids present), spreading evidence everywhere that would be almost impossible to clean up and causing people to notice a disturbance. Plus, if the dog is in the house or backyard and Laci’s car is in the driveway, it’s obvious Laci never left the house and in the absence of evidence of a break-in or abduction (other people’s prints, hair, etc. in the house), the only option is to put the lead on the dog, keep her tied up until you’re ready to go and then let her loose. That way she’s not disturbing the crime scene, the clean up and it suggests she wasn’t at home when she was killed.
I’ll add that in our neighbourhood, dogs are regularly getting out and we know where they belong and put them back in their backyards. The neighbour stated, as far as I’m aware, that she had an appointment she needed to get to, that’s why she was so sure of the time she found the dog (she would have known when the appt was and whether or not she was late, approximately how long it took her to get there, etc), and likely didn’t have time to look around and try to find Laci or Scott but wanted the dog to be safe.
LikeLike