Posted on 01/08/2004 5:18:23 AM PST by runningbear
Judge to Hear Arguments on Moving Peterson Trial
Thursday, January 08, 2004
MODESTO, Calif. — The judge in the Laci Peterson (search) murder case hears arguments Thursday on the defense request to move Scott Peterson's (search) trial out of Modesto.
Laci Peterson's husband is charged with murdering her and their unborn son just over a year ago.
Peterson's lawyer, Mark Geragos (search), says Modesto citizens are prejudiced against his client, making it difficult for him to get a fair trial. Geragos has referred to Laci Peterson as a "posthumous celebrity," and says her husband has been demonized.
Prosecutors say widespread publicity makes a change of venue pointless. They say the jury selection process will eliminate anyone who's mind is already made up. And they blame Geragos himself for much of the publicity. ......
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Prosecutors seek to muzzle Jackson's attorney, others in case
Prosecutors seek to muzzle Jackson's attorney, others in case
By LINDA DEUTSCH
AP Special Correspondent
LOS ANGELES --
Michael Jackson's prosecutors asked a judge Wednesday to issue a rigid publicity gag order similar to the one in effect at the Scott Peterson murder trial. Both cases are being defended by the same lawyer, Mark Geragos.
The prosecution's 58-page filing demanded a seven-point order that would prohibit Geragos, Jackson and virtually every person with any connection to the case from talking to the news media.
"There are two prosecutions pending in California that, for different reasons, are each the object of unrelenting comment and speculation in the tabloid press, 'tabloid television' and even the regular purveyors of news," the motion said, "the Scott Peterson matter, because of its brutality, and the Michael Jackson matter, because of the celebrity of the defendant and the nature of the alleged crime."
The clear target of the motion was Geragos.
"Attorney Geragos has not been shy about offering his own opinion about the supposed 'financial motive' of the boy identified as the victim in this case and the boy's family for reporting their concerns to the authorities," the motion said.
It quoted Geragos as calling the family's actions "a shakedown" and a "scam" and declaring that Jackson is "factually innocent."
Geragos told The Associated Press he would file an answer to the motion Monday, opposing a gag order. He called the motion "outrageous."
"When I first read it, I wondered if the district attorney's office was suffering from short-term memory loss," Geragos said. "I was not the one conducting multiple press conferences with audio and visual displays."
He cited a list of questions and answers Santa Barbara County District ........
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Prosecutors seek to muzzle Jackson's attorney, others in case
Prosecutors seek to muzzle Jackson's attorney, others in case
By LINDA DEUTSCH, AP Special Correspondent
(Published Wednesday, January 7, 2004, 9:11 PM)
LOS ANGELES (AP) - Michael Jackson's prosecutors asked a judge Wednesday to issue a rigid publicity gag order similar to the one in effect at the Scott Peterson murder trial. Both cases are being defended by the same lawyer, Mark Geragos.
The prosecution's 58-page filing demanded a seven-point order that would prohibit Geragos, Jackson and virtually every person with any connection to the case from talking to the news media.
"There are two prosecutions pending in California that, for different reasons, are each the object of unrelenting comment and speculation in the tabloid press, 'tabloid television' and even the regular purveyors of news," the motion said, "the Scott Peterson matter, because of its brutality, and the Michael Jackson matter, because of the celebrity of the defendant and the nature of the alleged crime."
The clear target of the motion was Geragos.
"Attorney Geragos ......
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recap on prior story: Geragos: Peterson evidence 'feeble'
Geragos: Peterson evidence 'feeble'
By JOHN COTÉ
BEE STAFF WRITER
Last Updated: December 23, 2003, 07:13:00 AM PST
Police "deliberately ignored" evidence that would have benefited Scott Peterson, and prosecutors have failed to show that his wife's death involved a crime, according to a motion seeking to dismiss double-murder charges. "The police -- from the very beginning -- decided that their job was to put Scott Peterson on death row," defense attorney Mark Geragos wrote in the motion filed Monday afternoon in Stanislaus County Superior Court.
"They deliberately ignored any exculpatory evidence, and from day one worked only toward the goal of putting Scott in the gas chamber," Geragos said in a 12-page motion laced with disparaging comments about police and prosecutors.
The motion challenges the order holding Peterson for trial, handed down last month at the close of his 12-day preliminary hearing on charges he murdered his wife, Laci, and unborn son, Conner. Prosecutors are seeking the death penalty, which in California is administered by lethal injection or gas.
Chief Deputy District Attorney John Goold said he had not reviewed the motion and would not comment on it. A formal prosecution response is expected Jan. 8.
"We'll make our response known and address the applicable law in the paperwork we file," Goold said.
The defense contends there is no reasonable cause to order Peterson to stand trial, because prosecutors failed at the preliminary hearing to show the deaths involved a crime and did not present physical or circumstantial evidence to indicate Peterson murdered his wife and child. In April, passersby found the bodies of mother and son along the shoreline of San Francisco Bay, a few miles from where Scott Peterson said he went fishing Dec. 24. He reported his wife missing later that day.
The standard of proof prosecutors are required to meet at a preliminary hearing is significantly lower than what's required to find a defendant guilty at trial. The defense motion to set aside the ruling and dismiss the case has little chance of success, legal observers have said.
Judge Marie Silveira is scheduled to hear the motion Jan. 14.
Peterson's trial is set for Jan. 26, but that date will likely be pushed back if Girolami grants a defense request to move the trial because of massive publicity..........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Deadline missed for defense to fight judge's holdling order
Deadline missed for defense to fight judge's holdling order
By JOHN COTÉ
BEE STAFF WRITER
Last Updated: December 18, 2003, 08:57:00 AM PST
Scott Peterson's defense team has missed a court-imposed deadline for filing a motion challenging the order holding him for trial on double-murder charges. The lapse, however, likely will have little or no legal impact on the case, observers said.
Judge Al Girolami had ordered the motion to be filed by 10 a.m. Tuesday. It had not been filed with Stanislaus County Superior Court by the close of business Wednesday, court staff said.
Court officials posted a notice Wednesday afternoon asking journalists to stop calling to inquire about the document.
Peterson attorney Mark Geragos did not return calls seeking comment.
Geragos announced his intention to file the motion last month following Peterson's preliminary hearing. Such motions seek to set aside a judge's ruling at a preliminary hearing, arguing the prosecution presented insufficient evidence.
The motions rarely succeed, legal observers said.
Judge Al Girolami earlier this month ordered Peterson held for trial on charges he murdered his wife, Laci, and unborn son, Conner.
Judge Marie Silveira is assigned to hear the motion Jan. 7.
Under state law, Peterson's attorneys have 60 days from his Dec. 3 arraignment to file the motion, but a judge could fine Peterson's attorney for missing a court-imposed deadline, attorneys said..........
A Fair Laci Trial In Home County?
A Fair Laci Trial In Home County?
MODESTO, Calif., Dec. 16, 2003
"One reason Scott looks like a demon is what he did himself after the disappearance of his wife." S.F. prosecutor Jim Hammer
Attorney Mark Geragos (Photo: AP)
(CBS/AP) The judge in the Laci Peterson murder case will hear arguments Thursday on the defense request to move Scott Peterson's trial out of Modesto, California.
Laci Peterson's husband is charged with murdering her and their unborn son just over a year ago.
Attorneys for Scott Peterson say there is no way their client can get a fair trial in Stanislaus County and they want the case to be moved, preferably to Los Angeles, reports CBS News Correspondent Steve Futterman. His lawyers claim that nearly 60 percent of the potential jurors in the Modesto area believe Peterson is either guilty or probably guilty.
However, Gloria Gomez of CBS affiliate KOVR reports a prosecution poll indicates that 80 percent of county residents say they would keep an open mind.
It was the people of the Modesto area who searched day after day for Laci Peterson, who held candles of hope and shed tear of despair when her .......
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Heated Venue Battle In Peterson Case
Heated Venue Battle In Peterson Case
POSTED: 4:18 PM PST January 7, 2004
MODESTO, Calif. -- On the eve of the change of venue hearing in the Scott Peterson double murder trial one thing became apparent -- emotions will be running high Thursday morning when both sides take their seats in the Stanislaus County courtroom of Judge Al Girolami.
Peterson Case Special Section
Both parties will be in court to see if Girolami will grant a change of venue in the case in which Peterson is charged with killing his wife, Laci, and unborn son, Connor, in the early morning hours of Christmas Eve 2002. Prosecutors contend that Scott Peterson drove his pregnant wife's remains to San Francisco Bay and dumped them in the waters of Richmond, Calif.
The partial remains of Laci Peterson and her unborn son were found along the shoreline in April. If convicted, Peterson faces the death penalty.
In court documents filed late Tuesday, prosecutors and defense attorney Mark Geragos delivered a series of body blows that would be the envy of any heavyweight boxer. At the center of the dispute was the prosecution's filing of a challenge to the defense request to the change of venue filed last Friday.
Deputy District Attorney James Brazelton didn't mince words in that filing, charging the defense with leaking information that fanned the flames of publicity.
"The publicity in (this) case has to the great extent ......
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
That's me boiling eggs to make egg salad for lunch tomorrow...Sorry!
AMEN!!! With all due respect to the smart L.A. people on this forum, the rest of the country lost respect for L.A. when we saw some of its dumbest citizens, and America's dumbest verdict, paraded for everyone to see! The DEFENSE suggested Alameda? Then I don't trust Alameda! How about San Jose? Or, San Joaquin (is that a county out there)?
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.