What kind of a conspiracy theorist do you have to be to suggest that Scott Peterson murdered his pregnant wife the day before numerous, reliable witnesses saw her walking her dog?

Welcome to the wild and wacky world of tunnel vision, where the name of the game is to win at all cost. Unfortunately, the consequence of this game is that innocent people are wrongfully accused and convicted.

Pundits like Nancy Grace erroneously claimed that Scott's boat is too little for sturgeon fishing but it's big enough to contain a body, tarps, anchors, cement blocks, and even a 55 gallon drum filled with cement. Meanwhile, the scent dog who 'indicated' to its handler that Laci was taken in a car is believed without question but numerous scent dogs who tracked Laci down Covena Street to Yosemite street and along Yosemite street to Maze boulevard are not considered credible.

The police find a single hair on a pair of pliers as described in the National Enquirer and Nancy Grace pompously gloats, "And this hair, not only do I think it will be traced back in one in millions to Laci Peterson, but the context in which it was found allegedly is what is so important about this hair. It allegedly is found in a pair of pliers on Scott Peterson's boat. Important? Laci had never been on the boat! The virgin voyage of the boat was the day Laci went missing, and on this boat turns up her hair."

The fact is, Scott went fishing alone and Laci was kidnapped while he was on that boat. If a hair was deliberately planted on a pair of pliers to manufacture an impression, it is not supported by ANY evidence.

Unfortunately, when the hunt for clues becomes a self-fulfilling prophesy rather than a discovery, you intentionally or inadvertently misrepresent. When Laci was still alive, the police hunted for clues in murky, silt-filled shallow waters where the visibility was nearly zero meaning they had to search the muddy bottom by hand. While the focus appeared intense, the divers were more likely to find a chest full of gold coins rather than evidence which was related to the murder of Laci Peterson because Scott had absolutely nothing to do with it.

In that context, mysterious, unexplained discoveries like a hair on a pliers in a boat is wishful thinking on steroids.

When the search for evidence is a blindfolded hunt for a needle in a haystack, comical ineptitude surrounds the search for Laci's killer or killers. Reality check; Laci was spotted walking her dog a day after Scott Peterson supposedly murdered her. The dog Mackenzie, was not another dog, and the lady that was spotted, was not another pregnant lady because Laci's dog is the only one in the neighborhood that returned home, without its pregnant master. Facts should be observed and investigated, not discounted because they do not fit a theory.

Periodic hunts for the proverbial needle in the haystack were kept mysterious through a gag order and the assumption that the police know more than they reveal is absolutely ridiculous in the face of absolute myopia.

The only name of the game was to create the false impression that Scott had murdered his wife the day before she was witnessed walking her dog, and the lunacy of that is not subject to dispute.

The initial plot to that effect involved a trucker who allegedly saw Scott transporting Laci's corpse on December 23, 2003. The trucker told his story on a radio talk show and it is was heard by many people in California. He was said to have been told by law enforcement not to talk to anyone else, but that didn't stop him from getting his story out through the local KFBK Sacramento radio station. The reporter stated a truck and trailer with a boat resembling the one belonging to Scott Peterson cut him off while he was driving on 99 south, towards Fresno (kind of between Laci's home and his girlfriend's home. The truck driver said he drove along side Scott's truck for a long period of time, close to 80 miles. He went on to say he observed a women in the passenger side of the truck with her left shoulder slumped down, her head was hanging down with her hair covering her face. This women never moved for the 80 miles that he observed. He reported info to the police immediately following Laci's disappearance and was asked not to speak -- according to KFBK Sacramento radio station's broadcast!

This bizarre story was published in the National Enquirer on May 20, 2003, but it was not credible enough to justify the arrest of Scott Peterson. Needless to say, it was followed by other media leaks like the following; "FRESNO, Calif., Sept. 20 (UPI) -- A Fresno County Jail inmate claims accused killer Scott Peterson plotted with Neo-nazis against his pregnant wife about a month before she disappeared.

Cory Lee Carroll passed a polygraph test and met this week with investigators in the Laci Peterson case, his attorney told the Fresno Bee.

Officials directly associated with the case refused to comment on the claims, citing a gag order imposed by the court."

How convenient

The bizarre, Neo-nazi (projection theory?) sounded like a new twist to the old standard gimmick --the false accusation of the jailhouse snitch -- Attorney Frank Muna told ABCNEWS' Good Morning America his client, Cory Lee Carroll, a convicted forger, thief and parole violator, told him the story about Peterson while submitting to a lie detector test administered by Muna's private investigator. Muna said he called authorities after Carroll passed the test while giving the account. Modesto Police have not commented on Carroll's story, citing a gag order in the case. Did a 'Neo-Nazi gang' kidnap Laci Peterson even though the prosecution repeatedly insisted that Scott Peterson murdered Laci on the 23rd or the 24th of December?

Regardless, somebody was working awfully hard to create the false impression that Scott Peterson was responsible for the disappearance of his wife. The only problem is, a murder is solved by acknowledging credible evidence and by exposing the gimmicks that conspire to cover up the truth. The hard work of a Fresno County Jail inmate who falsely claimed that accused murderer Scott Peterson broached the idea of kidnapping his wife while meeting with two members of a Neo-Nazi gang about a month before a pregnant Laci Peterson disappeared, was a fiction whose motivation was never investigated. Why was Cory Lee Carroll, interviewed in jail by investigators from the Modesto Police Department and the Stanislaus County District Attorney's Office? Why have police divers returned to the bay, to fish for clues?

If Jailhouse snitches were fed information "only the killers would know" and police divers were still looking for a way to implicate Scott, they never found it. This is what the media indicated on September 20, 2003:

"On Friday, divers from the Contra Costa County Sheriff's Department searched the waters of the east San Francisco Bay for additional evidence in the Laci Peterson murder case. The divers concentrated their efforts in the area of Point Isabella, near Richmond. However, investigators would not say what they were seeking."

If the police wanted to solve the murder they should have probably arrested those who planted false evidence.

On June 26, 2003, prosecutors said that witnesses were not available for a preliminary inquiry that had been scheduled for next month.

In the meantime, prosecution theories about how Laci was murdered were supported by pure speculation. It was allegedly a hard kill, then it was a date-rape drug-induced, soft kill and now, it was a planned kidnapping? The prosecution refused to believe that Laci was kidnapped until a bunch of Neo-Nazis told them so? If you think the satanic cult killing theory was silly, prosecution speculation was absolute lunacy.

Bullshit aside, Scott Peterson was clearly the one and only person who had the most to lose from the fact that his pregnant wife was kidnapped and murdered. In fact, the stupid theory that Scott murdered his own unborn child because he wanted to be married to a single mom with a child that was not even his, is the fabrication of absolute morons, not a serious DA office theory.

Prosecutors did not even have enough evidence to hold Scott so they stalled for time, to give them the opportunity figure it out. They consequently delayed the preliminary inquiry when they should have in fact exonerated Scott Peterson.

According to Ted Rowlands, Scott Peterson was upset over the fact that the Prosecutor delayed his preliminary inquiry. In his own words:

Probably the most surprising thing is that Scott Peterson actually spoke out today in court and seemed to be upset when he was asked if he was willing to waive time. He said, "Yes, I'll waive time," begrudgingly, in effect, and he sort of pointed at the prosecution, he said, "because they're not giving us the evidence," they've pushed back the preliminary hearing. It was to be July 15. It will now take place on September 9. That has been expected. But it seemed like Peterson was generally upset about it and wanted to say something in open court.

The prosecutors said that witnesses were not available for the preliminary inquiry, and now, it appears, they meant that witnesses had not been successfully cultivated because the trucker was not credible. They are currently testing the credibility of Neo-Nazis who claim that Scott Peterson is responsible for kidnapping his own wife.

It is popular to assert that the sneaky, Mark Geragos deferred the preliminary hearing because delays benefit the defense, but that is a load of crap. In open court, the defense team said, "We still aren't getting evidence from the prosecution that they have a responsibility to turn over to us" and Rick Distaso, the assistant DA, said "listen, we're having trouble getting some of that information over to the defense. So it is still going on, this discovery problem, the slow discovery making its way to the defense." Needless to say, discovery hasn't even reached the prosecution yet, because they are still looking for a needle in the haystack through the eyes of Neo-Nazis.

As long as the prosecution withholds discovery evidence [because they have nothing credible] they indefinitely postpone the preliminary inquiry, and it will be interesting to see how much time they are going to waste trying to cultivate a witness who is credible. Scott Peterson, who has repeatedly and emphatically indicated that he had absolutely nothing to do with the disappearance of his wife, is the only credible witness to date.

Scott Peterson was spotted at the Marina WITHOUT LACI at the very same time that Laci was spotted walking her dog, and the theories of quacks who manufactured delusion to implicate Scott Peterson are ludicrous. For example, Scott Peterson had allegedly coached his dog to return home without a leash, to fool the police. The bottom line is that outside of preposterous speculation, the so called "evidence" that implicates Scott is exculpatory and that spells innocent until PROVEN guilty, not guilty until proven innocent, and that alone proves Scott Peterson's conviction is simply a consequence of the fact that his legal/constitutional rights were flagrantly ignored.

Vivian Mitchell, 78, clearly indicated that her husband, Billand her were the last known people to see Laci Peterson, but she said the Modesto police did not even talk to her about their Christmas Eve sighting.

"I called and told them that I'd seen whom I thought was her and it would be pretty difficult to have an identical twin and identical dog," Mitchell told ABCNEWS affiliate KGO in San Francisco. "I did think that it was strange they didn't call. I just thought they had some information that over-rode what I had seen and I just thought it was strange that nobody ever followed up," she said.

Mitchell says it took her a week to call the police because she assumed others in the neighborhood had also seen Peterson walking her dog.

Mitchell says she remembers seeing Peterson, who was eight months pregnant at the time, between 10 a.m. and 10:15 a.m. on Dec. 24. That's about 45 minutes after Scott Peterson had said goodbye to his wife and went fishing.

Mitchell was very clear and very specific about that fact that Laci Peterson walked her dog on December the 24th, Christmas Eve, when the dog returned home without Laci and there is no credible way to dispute these simple, undeniable facts.

The media disputed Vivian Mitchell's observations through FBI profiler, Candace DeLong, who claimed that it was somebody else and not Laci who walked her dog on Christmas eve, but that fraud facilitated the murder of Laci because another witness spotted Laci in Longview Washington trying to escape her abductor. Needless to say, since the authorities falsely claimed that Scott had murdered Laci when she was abducted, they facilitated the opportunity to get away with her murder.

Vivian Mitchell's unshakeable certainty was endearing and she swore (not under oath because she was found dead) she saw Laci pass by her kitchen window, shortly after 10 a.m. the day Laci disappeared. According to Mrs. Mitchell, "That was the lady I saw. And she is so striking. Beautiful Lady and a Beautiful Dog." Mrs. Mitchell was emphatic, "she was so pretty, that you couldn't help but look." Her words survive death and they have never been credibly disputed.

The first thing competent investigators do when a person goes missing is to identify the clothing of the person that everybody should be looking for. Investigators in the Peterson case focused on trying to prove that Scott Peterson killed Laci and lied about what she was wearing. Needless to say, Vivian Mitchell is the only witness worth listening to, under the circumstances.

Investigators were not even able to identify the cause of death, and that too was evidently well concealed by Laci's killers. Firearms are responsible for most homicides and it appeared as if the remains of Laci were recovered in a manner that was deliberately supposed to conceal the probability that Laci Peterson was shot in the head if a firearm, which is a reasonable probability, was in fact responsible for claiming her life. Moreover, the possibility that Laci was shot by the man she was spotted with in Longview Washington, is also very, very high.

Make no mistake about it, the authorities should have focused all their attention on the obsession to recover Laci's head, dead or alive, rather than on the stupid effort to recover the cement anchors that Scott Peterson allegedly used to sink her body.

Time to drop ALL the bullshit and to get real.

How was Laci murdered? When was Laci murdered? Where was Laci murdered? Why was Laci kidnapped? Those are the four questions that must be investigated to adequately expose the people who are responsible for the peculiar abduction and murder of Laci Peterson.

Defense Attorney, Christopher Pixley put it best, when he said; "But at this point, what's more logical, that Scott Peterson murdered his wife without leaving a trace of evidence, no blood or DNA anywhere, removed her head and her limbs from her body, potentially excised the baby from the womb, or that some deranged psychopath snatched her in a park and did it? I think there comes a point in time where it is more likely that someone else committed this crime, whether it's a satanic cult or just some crazed transient, than Scott Peterson himself." Christopher Pixley did not solve the murder, but neither did he make it impossible to do so, by blaming an innocent man.

In stark contrast, on May 5, 2003, goofy pundit, Nancy Grace said, "the worst thing that could happen to the defense is for the state to finally find anchors, if they exist at the bottom of the bay, through the use of a very interesting technique called side scan sonar. If those anchors are found and linked back to Scott Peterson, it is over."

It's not over until Laci's kidnappers and murderers are in prison.

Next: The new Daniel Ellsberg CLICK HERE