Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Friend: Peterson was frantic
The Modesto Bee ^ | 12/05/03 | Garth stapely

Posted on 12/08/2003 5:52:00 AM PST by runningbear

Friend: Peterson was frantic

Friend: Peterson was frantic

By GARTH STAPLEY
BEE STAFF WRITER

Last Updated: December 5, 2003, 07:25:21 AM PST

Scott Peterson sounded frantic when he called a friend after Peterson's pregnant wife disappeared Christmas Eve, Modesto businessman Gregory Reed said Thursday. Reed's name surfaced in the intrigue-packed preliminary hearing for Scott Peterson. The hearing ended Nov. 18 with a judge ordering the 31-year-old former fertilizer salesman to stand trial on charges of slaying Laci Peterson and their unborn son, Conner.

Other former acquaintances of the defendant, also mentioned at the proceeding, refused to comment.

Reed and his wife, Kristen, held private Lamaze sessions attended by the Petersons, who lived a few blocks away in the La Loma neighborhood. Gregory Reed previously said the Petersons brought meals and visited after the Reeds' child was born.

"They were good people," Reed said Thursday.

At the preliminary hearing, detectives testified that on the night of Dec. 24, Scott Peterson told them he fished alone briefly that day in San Francisco Bay. Peterson said his wife, who had been planning to walk their dog when he left, was gone when he returned.

Prosecutors contend that Peterson used his pickup to transport the body of his wife to his work warehouse and then to the bay.

Steve Jacobson, a prosecution investigator, testified that Peterson used his cell phone to call Reed shortly after leaving the Berkeley Marina on Dec. 24, and again later that evening. There was nothing unusual about the first call, Reed said.

"I could tell he was driving," Reed said, "but I don't know where. I could hear road noise and feedback.

"A few hours later I did get that frantic phone call. I caught up with him and went over to the house."

Family members, friends and neighbors gathered that night to post fliers and search for the mother-to-be.

Peterson's attorney, Mark Geragos of Los Angeles, appeared at the hearing to draw the image of a man concerned at having returned to an empty house. Jacobson confirmed that Peterson made numerous calls the evening of Dec. 24, including several to his wife's mother, Sharon Rocha, and sister, Amy Rocha, and later to 911........

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Taping calls is legally tricky

By GARTH STAPLEY
BEE STAFF WRITER

Last Updated: December 6, 2003, 07:01:58 AM PST

Amber Frey secretly taped her phone conversations with suspected double-murderer Scott Peterson, but such an action is only legal under very specific circumstances. Recording calls is against the law in California -- unless the one taping gets the other person's consent. Another law permits covert recording to gather evidence of certain crimes, including murder.

That's how Frey did it. In fact, she had help from detectives who bought her a recording device and showed her how to use it -- hoping she could extract evidence from her boyfriend.

Peterson, 31, is scheduled to stand trial Jan. 26 on charges of murdering his pregnant wife, Laci, and their unborn son, Conner. Prosecutors are seeking the death penalty.

In a preliminary hearing last month, authorities suggested that the defendant's romance with Frey may have provided him with a motive to kill his wife.

Frey approached Modesto police on Dec. 30, six days after Laci Peterson went missing, and began cooperating with authorities. Detective Al Brocchini testified that he gave her taping equipment that same day.

Brocchini said he bought some of it at Radio Shack. The store sells a "recorder control" for $24.19 -- with a caution urging buyers to check local laws because taping without consent is illegal in some states.

Questioning from a defense attorney suggested that Frey had begun taping their calls on her own as of Dec. 16.

In any case, she continued recording their calls for about seven weeks. Transcripts from one featured Peterson saying he was "longing to hold onto" Frey; he repeatedly deflected questions about having previously lied about his wife and unborn baby.

Authorities also obtained wiretap warrants for Peterson's cell phones allowing them to record all of his calls. Those recordings were not discussed at the preliminary hearing, though prosecutors reserved the option of introducing that evidence at trial.

Before 1967, anyone in California could tape a phone chat without fear of going afoul of the law. But state legislators that year adopted a series of eavesdropping statutes, including one prohibiting one-party-consent recording.

"To me, it's just offensive that people record conversations, in terms of .......

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Superior Court, Stanislaus County December 5, 2003

Minute Order: Findings on Sealing Orders

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Superior Court, Stanislaus County December 5, 2003

Minute Order: Correction to Minute Order of 12/3/03.....

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(Excerpt) Read more at modbee.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Extended News; Government; News/Current Events; US: California
KEYWORDS: avoidingchildsupport; baby; babyunborn; conner; deathpenaltytime; dontubelievemyalibi; faker; getarope; ibefishing; laci; lacipeterson; liar; nohewasnt; phony; phonybologna; smallbaby; smallchild; sonkiller; unborn; wifekiller
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 181-200201-220221-240 ... 661-664 next last
To: Sandylapper; Canadian Outrage
Don't they have to provide all evidence to prevent the possibility of a mistrial? Or, at a later date Scott/Geragos could ask for a new trial if something is omitted?
201 posted on 12/12/2003 5:21:46 PM PST by Lucy Lake (Spell-check is a great invention, so are turn signals.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 196 | View Replies]

To: Devil_Anse
I saw that interview too Dev. He was rather pathetic. His schtick may be good for the Montanan countryside or Wyoming, I think it is, but hardly the big city. btw. You have freepmail
202 posted on 12/12/2003 5:23:18 PM PST by Canadian Outrage (All us Western Canuks belong South!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 199 | View Replies]

To: grizzfan
When it gets to trial they must disclose their evidence to the other side. In the Prelim they are allowed to outline their case in a barebones way. Geragos already knows a lot of the sealed evidence. Why do you think he wants the wiretaps excluded, the GPS evidence excluded? the autopsy photo's excluded? and on and on. He doesn't want the warrants unsealed. He KNOWS it will be damaging.
203 posted on 12/12/2003 5:26:41 PM PST by Canadian Outrage (All us Western Canuks belong South!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 201 | View Replies]

To: Sandylapper
You didn't go wrong anywhere, LOL, it could be me getting confused.

My point was that we don't know the "reasons" for the search warrant. LE had to go to a judge to obtain the warrant for the Dec. 25th search and then for the Feb. 18th search. The **reasons** (observations, statements...etc)for the warrants were not brought up at the PH and we know next to nothing about those reasons.

Am I making sense? It's hard to articulate exactly what I'm trying to say! LOL
204 posted on 12/12/2003 5:28:57 PM PST by Velveeta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 192 | View Replies]

To: grizzfan
LOL - Make that Montana!! not Montanan. Sheesh. I'm leaving my office soon to drive home in a nice snowfall after dark. btw, I wore my Leather jacket this morning and it has fringes. FOFL!!
205 posted on 12/12/2003 5:30:47 PM PST by Canadian Outrage (All us Western Canuks belong South!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 201 | View Replies]

To: Velveeta
Who says we have to make sense all the time??? LOL
206 posted on 12/12/2003 5:32:44 PM PST by Canadian Outrage (All us Western Canuks belong South!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 204 | View Replies]

To: Canadian Outrage
For a while I was telling myself to give Geragos a break because he was just doing his job. Now, after today's display of disgusting jocularity, I think he's almost as bad as the man he's defending.

Geragos stated that the autopsy photos of Laci were "seared" into his brain. Well, I'd like to see them branded to his forehead.
207 posted on 12/12/2003 5:32:48 PM PST by Velveeta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 193 | View Replies]

To: Velveeta
I heard him say that and I hope the Prosecutor is allowed to play THAT clip right after he plays the clip of him calling Peterson a Psychopath!!
208 posted on 12/12/2003 5:34:29 PM PST by Canadian Outrage (All us Western Canuks belong South!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 207 | View Replies]

To: Canadian Outrage
LOL - Make that Montana!! not Montanan

I knew what you meant to write!...Snow here, also. You have freepmail.

209 posted on 12/12/2003 5:37:25 PM PST by Lucy Lake (Spell-check is a great invention, so are turn signals.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 205 | View Replies]

To: Sandylapper
Would it really matter how he transported her to the bay?

Yes.

The DA would have to show "how" she ended up in the bay. Otherwise some chucking fool defense attorney will try to insinuate that Laci tied herself up in plastic and duct tape and hopped to the bay with weights attached to every limb and threw herself in where Scott was fishing. Just to spite him, of course.

210 posted on 12/12/2003 5:38:29 PM PST by Velveeta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 196 | View Replies]

To: drjulie
I also found the part about his supposedly dressing her corpse to be strange.

We could just say, he had already planned to report her as going missing while walking the dog, so he had to have her dressed in clothes, in case the body was found. Also, b/c if any of her female relatives later noticed that ONE of her maternity nightie outfits was missing...

Or, more likely, he didn't plan quite THAT specifically--he just knew that if her nightclothes ever came off her body and washed ashore, or if her body were found, still wearing nightclothes, that would pretty much eliminate as a suspect anyone EXCEPT the person who was with her the night of the 23rd... and we know who THAT was...

As for the idea that they had a really bad, physical fight, but then she later was sleeping in the bed, you have a good point: who sleeps after something like that? She would be more likely to stay up crying, or stay up locked in some room, or get in her car and drive to her mother's or her sister's, or maybe just to a hotel, if she didn't want anyone to know. I think the theory that they fought furiously, but then she later slept, is something the police have put together b/c they can't otherwise fit all the known facts together--they can't otherwise have her vomiting, but then also sleeping peacefully.
211 posted on 12/12/2003 5:38:57 PM PST by Devil_Anse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 146 | View Replies]

To: Devil_Anse
Maybe she had been drugged and needed to lie down, even though she had struggled/fought with Scott?
212 posted on 12/12/2003 5:41:58 PM PST by Lucy Lake (Spell-check is a great invention, so are turn signals.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 211 | View Replies]

To: grizzfan
Don't they have to provide all evidence to prevent the possibility of a mistrial?

Not at the preliminary hearing. The prosecution presents enough for a judge to discern the possibility of guilt, to justify going to trial.

213 posted on 12/12/2003 5:42:02 PM PST by Velveeta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 201 | View Replies]

To: Devil_Anse
BBS!!
214 posted on 12/12/2003 5:42:36 PM PST by Canadian Outrage (All us Western Canuks belong South!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 211 | View Replies]

To: Velveeta
correction: Dec 26th search
215 posted on 12/12/2003 5:43:12 PM PST by Velveeta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 204 | View Replies]

To: Canadian Outrage
It's been a loooong day!
216 posted on 12/12/2003 5:44:33 PM PST by Velveeta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 206 | View Replies]

To: Canadian Outrage
Do you think Geragos' own statements, before he was SP's paid plate spinner, are going to be in that 8000 pages of information he wants to present to the judge? ROFL!
217 posted on 12/12/2003 5:47:28 PM PST by Velveeta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 208 | View Replies]

To: Jackie-O
I think if Snott did go thru the trouble of changing her pj's it was only to fit in with the story that she went missing the next morning.

We're thinking alike on that one!

218 posted on 12/12/2003 5:58:24 PM PST by Devil_Anse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 150 | View Replies]

To: Velveeta
What a pathetic fool she is. And histrionic, as Jackie called it, is the perfect word for her antics.
219 posted on 12/12/2003 6:00:05 PM PST by Devil_Anse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 151 | View Replies]

To: grizzfan; Canadian Outrage; All
You may be right, grizz, CO. Maybe in a circumstantial case like this, all loose ends have to be tied.
220 posted on 12/12/2003 6:01:12 PM PST by Sandylapper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 201 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 181-200201-220221-240 ... 661-664 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson