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 ... 281-300301-320321-340 ... 661-664 next last
To: drjulie
DrJ!!!

Say it ain't so! Geragos not looking for neutral jurors??
301 posted on 12/13/2003 6:22:14 AM PST by Devil_Anse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 293 | View Replies]

To: Devil_Anse
"Say it ain't so! Geragos not looking for neutral jurors??"

Sorry to break it to you! :-) Actually this would be a really tough case for a jury consultant. JoEllen will really earn her pay here, as opposed to OJ which was simple. The prosecution did recover, somewhat, after the poker incident in the M.Peterson trial but it was, I believe, a mistake on their part to propose that he killed her with a specific poker that was missing. I wondered about the ethics with regard to that poker. It was mightly ironic that it happened to be discovered when it was. When I was in social services I worked with quite a few lawyers - both prosecution and defense. I have a great deal of respect for those who really tried to be ethical and play by the rules. It did seem like I ran into quite a few defense attorneys who had questionable ethics so I tend to be biased and suspicious.
302 posted on 12/13/2003 6:42:25 AM PST by drjulie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 301 | View Replies]

To: drjulie
Jo Ellen will really earn her pay here

LOL, Jo Ellen may jump ship if Scott doesn't raise some more money, to pay her! The lawyers will have a hard time getting out of this thing, now that it's been set for trial, even if the money runs out and they don't get paid what was agreed. But the others, such as the jury consultant, they are free to say "adios" the minute the agreed-on fee is not forthcoming.

303 posted on 12/13/2003 7:03:59 AM PST by Devil_Anse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 302 | View Replies]

To: Devil_Anse
"Jo Ellen may jump ship if Scott doesn't raise some more money>"

Good point. She's not locked in like the attorneys.
304 posted on 12/13/2003 7:55:58 AM PST by drjulie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 303 | View Replies]

To: drjulie
Or locked in like Scott (lol).
305 posted on 12/13/2003 8:02:35 AM PST by Devil_Anse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 304 | View Replies]

To: Devil_Anse
Thanks, I'm glad you remember it (don't remember it) the same way I do/don't! LOL
306 posted on 12/13/2003 10:49:08 AM PST by Velveeta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 297 | View Replies]

To: Devil_Anse
Another interesting dynamic is the lack of the support for Lee and Jackie from their own "spawn". Seems they don't give a care....and why should they, really?
307 posted on 12/13/2003 10:51:51 AM PST by Velveeta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 298 | View Replies]

To: clouda
Those pictures make me sick too!! I don't even think the guy is good looking. He's a real puke.
308 posted on 12/13/2003 11:39:41 AM PST by Canadian Outrage (All us Western Canuks belong South!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 274 | View Replies]

To: Velveeta
Yes, the only one who follows along like she was on Jim Jones' Kool-aid is Janey, the docile daughter-in-law. (And I'm not even sure Janey is still married to the son of the Petersons.)
309 posted on 12/13/2003 11:46:02 AM PST by Devil_Anse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 307 | View Replies]

To: Devil_Anse
your post #297 - I don't recall EVER hearing the Carrol was mentioned in any tape with Amber.
310 posted on 12/13/2003 11:46:25 AM PST by Canadian Outrage (All us Western Canuks belong South!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 297 | View Replies]

To: Velveeta; Devil_Anse
The semester's over & grades are done so I've had the luxury of perusing the net. On Welsleuths they are discussing a British tabloid report that Jackie & Lee have split - at least with regard to Scott's innocence. Lee supposedly sees the light...Jackie's still in the dark. I don't know that I believe it but it's interesting.
311 posted on 12/13/2003 11:48:37 AM PST by drjulie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 307 | View Replies]

To: Canadian Outrage
He wasn't, as far as I know. It was a misinterpretation of a news report, I think. I don't think Amber knows Carroll or knows anything about him--other than what we think we know about him.
312 posted on 12/13/2003 11:49:39 AM PST by Devil_Anse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 310 | View Replies]

To: drjulie
It sounds very plausible, given that the two were absent from some hearings lately, and I imagine Lee is the one who would do the driving, if they come up from San Diego.
313 posted on 12/13/2003 11:51:34 AM PST by Devil_Anse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 311 | View Replies]

To: Devil_Anse
"Yes, the only one who follows along like she was on Jim Jones' Kool-aid is Janey.."

She is a strange one. I don't really understand that dynamic but I'm pretty sure there's more than meets the eye. She's very passionate about Scott.
314 posted on 12/13/2003 11:52:06 AM PST by drjulie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 309 | View Replies]

To: drjulie
That's interesting Julie. I haven't seen much of Lee Peterson lately and Jackie Peterson is beginning to show frayed nerves and a cranky attitude. SP DEFINITELY inherited his pathology from the mother.
315 posted on 12/13/2003 12:09:57 PM PST by Canadian Outrage (All us Western Canuks belong South!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 311 | View Replies]

To: drjulie
I guess Janey has children, and that sometimes keeps a person close to his/her in-laws even after a divorce. But I wouldn't think she would be EXPECTED to be more openly supportive than the Petersons' actual children... but she is.
316 posted on 12/13/2003 12:14:43 PM PST by Devil_Anse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 314 | View Replies]

To: Devil_Anse
Sometimes Janey is even with her husband that she's separated from. These people are ALL strange.!!!
317 posted on 12/13/2003 12:17:34 PM PST by Canadian Outrage (All us Western Canuks belong South!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 316 | View Replies]

To: Canadian Outrage
Oh, she IS separated from him? Isn't it Joe Peterson?

I would guess that she still hangs around with them due to reasons involving her own children (if any), and/or money.
318 posted on 12/13/2003 12:25:06 PM PST by Devil_Anse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 317 | View Replies]

To: Devil_Anse
That's my understanding. Seems they have a civil "relationship" in any event. I was always puzzled by the fact that she was put out there as the "family" spokesperson. She wasn't very good at it.
319 posted on 12/13/2003 12:26:26 PM PST by Canadian Outrage (All us Western Canuks belong South!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 318 | View Replies]

To: Canadian Outrage
"That's my understanding. Seems they have a civil "relationship" in any event. I was always puzzled by the fact that she was put out there as the "family" spokesperson. She wasn't very good at it."

I wonder if she works outside the home? She is always with them so I can't imagine that she has a job. I heard someone say that they selected her as a spokesperson because she has a PR background. I do agree though, she was terrible. She said the dumbest things - for instance when she found out Scott had an affair she said she wanted to "slug him and then hug him". Wonder where she got her PR degree? LOL

320 posted on 12/13/2003 12:35:53 PM PST by drjulie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 319 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 281-300301-320321-340 ... 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