Scott Peterson's lawyer argues for L.A. County trial
Wednesday, January 7, 2004 Posted: 4:16 AM EST (0916 GMT)
(CNN) -- In the latest exchange of legal arguments in the Scott Peterson case, defense attorney Mark Geragos argued that the best place for his client to obtain a fair trial is in Los Angeles County.
Using the 1970 murder trial of Charles Manson as a precedent, Geragos stated that "in a case of massive publicity Los Angeles County will necessarily always be the venue of choice since the adversities of publicity are offset by a trial being conducted in a populous metropolitan area."
More than 9 million people -- one-fourth of the state's population -- reside in Los Angeles County. Stanislaus County, where the case is currently centered, has a population of 500,000.
Peterson is charged with the murders of his wife, Laci, and their unborn son in December 2002. Their bodies washed up from the San Francisco Bay in April 2003.
Last week, the prosecution cited the same People v. Manson case as a reason not to move the trial out of Stanislaus County. Because Charles Manson did not receive a change of venue out of Los Angeles in spite of massive pretrial publicity, District Attorney James Brazelton argued, then Scott Peterson could also receive a fair trial in the county where his crime was allegedly committed.
Manson and five of his followers were convicted in 1971 of murder and conspiracy to commit murder in the brutal killings of actress Sharon Tate and six others.
In his rebuttal argument filed in Modesto, California, on Tuesday, Geragos repeated his contention that Stanislaus County is too small and the citizens too involved in the case for the defendant to obtain a fair trial.
"Potential jurors in Los Angeles County or otherwise remote from Stanislaus County are far less likely to have had such an intimate involvement with this matter," Geragos wrote.............
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A recap story: Questions still haunt Laci Peterson case
Pregnant Modesto woman vanished one year ago.
Questions still haunt Laci Peterson case
Pregnant Modesto woman vanished one year ago.
The Modesto Bee
(Published Wednesday, December 24, 2003, 5:45 AM)
MODESTO -- The details of what happened a year ago today could determine whether Scott Peterson lives or dies. Prosecutors are seeking the death penalty for the 31-year-old fertilizer salesman, who they contend murdered his wife, Laci, and unborn son sometime late Dec. 23 or early Dec. 24 last year.
Peterson told Modesto police he decided that morning to go fishing in the San Francisco Bay rather than play golf. He last saw his wife mopping the floor as he left, and she planned to walk the dog that morning, he told police.
Detailed testimony from neighbors, police and family members during Peterson's 12-day preliminary hearing appear to corroborate parts of his alibi while also raising questions. Those include:
The fishing story: Peterson "couldn't say" what type of fish he was trying to catch when an officer asked him later that evening, a different officer testified. Neighbor Amie Krigbaum testified that Peterson "said that he was golfing all day" when he knocked on her door looking for his wife.
When Laci's stepfather asked him whether he was able to golf that day, Peterson said he decided to go fishing because it was too cold, the officer said.
The 10-minute window: The time span between a 10:08 a.m. call from Scott Peterson's cell phone and when a neighbor said she found the Petersons' dog in the street dragging its leash. The call was initiated through the cell tower that serves the Petersons' Covena Avenue home and then transferred to a second tower in downtown Modesto, indicating the caller was moving west.
The call could mark when Peterson left his home driving to his warehouse, which he told police he did about 9:30 that morning. If he left at 10:08 a.m., that would give his wife 10 minutes to finish mopping the floor, take the dog outside for a walk and be abducted before the dog is found at 10:18 a.m. But the call could have come from anywhere within a 11/2-mile radius that encompasses the Peterson home........
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------