Friend: Peterson was frantic

The Modesto Bee ^ | 12/05/03 | Garth stapely

[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.....

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

[drjulie]

"Whatever, notice that we never got an explanation as to why Scott would call her at 12:15 and say, "It's 2:15 and I'm leaving Berkeley now.""

I noticed that as well. I don't think we heard anything about this in the prelim. He as so obvious in making that statement to establish an alibi, clearly something one wouldn't be worried about when his/her loved one is missing.

[Devil_Anse]

Yes, you've said before that he showed signs of having already moved on with his wife--before the disappearance.

I never thought of Scott even having a grieving process, but I guess even he would have. Except it would probably be called something else when the person wasn't really sad to see Laci go: maybe the "adjustment to change" process? And I guess even screwed-up people like Scott would have to have such a process. And I guess it would have begun to take place whenever he made up his mind to get rid of her. This may mean that Laci herself was the only one close enough to him at the time, to have observed the process beginning. How creepy.

[Devil_Anse]

I find it hard to believe that Scott wouldn't have thought about how an answering machine, or a cellphone, will stamp the time on a call. I think it's possible that the time on Laci's phone was just set wrong.

But if he really did just make a mistake, and say 2:15 when it was 12:15, I'd say he made a big mistake with that one!

[Devil_Anse]

Thanks!

I was thinking of pointing out to that doubting poster that we now know cadaver dogs smelled a DEAD PERSON in the house, and on a tarp belonging to Scott which had been in Scott's truck on Dec. 24... but I decided to just let that poster read up on it himself. The dog-tracking evidence in this case certainly tells the tale clearly.

[RGSpincich]

MPD verified that the call to Laci's cell (and subsequent message) was made at about 2:15pm PST. It was addressed at the prelim, possibly on the last day.

[Devil_Anse]

Okay. That's what I thought, after reading the prelim testimony. But... have you read the NE? It has what it claims to be the transcript of Scott's Christmas morning interview with police. EXCERPT:

"BROCCHINI: OK. I, I, I only have a couple of concerns. One is the cell phone call that you made, but if you listen to it, that call is made at 12:17.

SCOTT: Which one's that?

BROCCHINI: The first one you made from, ah, Berkeley.

SCOTT: Was it?

BROCCHINI: Yeah, you said--

SCOTT: --From the boat.

BROCCHINI: No, you said 2:17, but the time stamp on that call says 12:17.

(Brocchini appeared to be suggesting that Scott left the 'Hey beautiful' message on Laci's cell phone two hours earlier than he claimed. If that was so, he would have been still on his way to the marina when he made the call, not just leaving the marina as he stated in the message.)"

[RGSpincich]

The time stamp mentioned by Brocchini was taken from Verizon (Laci's phone) using a Central Standard Time, it sounds like. Whatever it is, MPD had months to investigate it after the initial interview and they have accepted the 2:17 pm PST time as authentic. At the prelim there was some discussion about different time zones. It sounded like SP's phone records came back to MPD in EST.

[Devil_Anse]

Yeah, I remember they discussed time differences in relation to the time of the fax that came into Scott's office. Remember that? The fax had been moved out of the machine onto his desk--the same day it had come in--and since no one but Scott was going into his office, that meant he had been there and seen the fax that day.

But it wouldn't have been Central time on Laci's phone, if Scott said it was 2:17 by his reckoning, and Laci's phone said 12:17, b/c if it was 2:17 in Berkeley, it would be 4:17 in the Central time zone!

[RGSpincich]

Oops. Central Hawaii?

[Velveeta]

Jackie, thanks for the ping and Dr. Julie thank you for posting the link to the NE article. It's a fascinating glimpse into SP's distorted mind.

Asking for a "grief counselor" was an amazing request! I was shaking my head in disbelief at this guy. He couldn't for one stinking moment, even pretend to act like a husband hoping that his wife would soon be found.

[Velveeta]

Quite the psychic, isn't he? He just *knew* he was going to need to hook up with a grief counselor.

[Velveeta]

Only 361 shopping days til next Christmas! ROFL
Hope yours was as pleasant and cheerful as ours.

[Velveeta]

refers to leaving her a voice mail sometime "yesterday, 2:16pm"(wouldn't it still be the same day to him-most people would say "this afternoon")

Good Catch, Rusty. I agree that most people would say "this afternoon".

[Velveeta]

That mop bucket has always given me pause. Never have I *filled* a bucket to wash a floor. How about you? If Laci was bringing in groceries, then she was certainly able to *partially* fill a bucket to wash a floor. But then, I don't believe that she actually washed it to begin with...

[Devil_Anse]

Perhaps he was thinking in terms of fingerprints on the bucket--his fingerprints might be superimposed over Laci's, since he had been the last one to touch the bucket. And he may have wanted to explain that away even b/f the question was asked... ?

[Velveeta]

He moved through all of the stages of the grieving process in a few hours!

Great observation! In fact, rather than moving through the stages, I'd say he skipped right by most of the stages and settled on "acceptance". I agree with you that for us FRsleuths it's evidence of premeditation. The guy was counting the minutes until he can sell Laci's car, the house and be with Amber.

[Devil_Anse]

LOL! Looks that way!

"Oh, yeah, I forgot to mention, I went out a little farther in my boat than I expected..."

[Devil_Anse]

PLEEZ!! Our last Christmas gift (ordered on Dec. 15) just arrived today!! (At least, I hope it's the last!)

[Velveeta]

It could be the fingerprints on the bucket. Remember we all discussed how strange it was that SP offered up "bucket information" during his Diane Sawyer interview? Since LE had made a "big deal" out of the bucket by removing it from the house, he *offered* what he thought was a reasonable explanation for the freshly wet mop. It's just that none of his explanations about anything related to Laci's disappearance make any sense!

[Velveeta]

LOL! What goodies did Santa bring you this year?