GPS data at issue in Peterson case

Let's face it, Amber's hair would be problematic in any context, Runningbear! Can't you just see it? Prosecutor: "Blond hairs were found"... Allred: "Your Honor, my client is not blond...just like I'm not a redhead..."

Found this link on Court TV message board: Laci Peterson Case interesting: Analysis of Animal Hair
Using a Scanning Electron Microscope

Analysis of Animal Hair
Using a Scanning Electron Microscope

Vincent L. Reich
Scanning Electron Microscopy
Final Project

November 14, 2000

ABSTRACT

The purpose of this project was to take the information we have learned about the S.E.M. and its operation, and apply it in the analyzation of some subject. For the purposes of this experiment, several samples of animal hair were placed in the S.E.M. for high magnification analysis. The types of hair used in the experiment were cat, dog, rat, rabbit, and human hair. The results showed a very similar pattern for all the different hair types; however, each sample had some characteristic that set it apart from the other types. All observations, results, and conclusions will be discussed in greater detail in the appropriate sections of this report.

INTRODUCTION / OBJECTIVES

Hair is something that most of us don’t think too much about, but is still very important and serves many purposes. In mammals, hair serves as an insulator, camouflage, sensory organs (like whiskers), and so on. In criminal law, hair found at a crime scene is often taken as evidence for identification (although this a very broad identification). By analyzing several samples of hair with the S.E.M., it is hoped that each sample has some characteristic that sets it apart from the others, so that identification of the species is possible. It is probable that all types of hair will look very much alike as they are all made up of mostly keratin and proteins. However, the structure of the samples will be examined so that insight into the make-up of animal hair is possible. Specifically, the hair samples will be examined on the basis of average size or thickness, surface texture, patterning, and others. It is hoped that these observations are consistent with the environment in which the animal lives, and the specific purpose(s) that the hair serves in each case. .......

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

Question was for this link was because Scott got a hair cut Dec 23rd? and hair cut questions came up. ...............

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

Peterson Trial: A Day Of Backroom Haggling

POSTED: 4:53 pm PST February 19, 2004

REDWOOD CITY, Calif. -- After spending a day behind closed doors, the key players in Scott Peterson's double-murder trial appeared in open court Thursday just long enough for a judge to adjourn for the day.

Video

Video On Demand: Ted Rowlands On Thursday's Closed Door Discussions

Judge Alfred Delucchi said testimony would resume Monday.

Peterson, his defense team and Delucchi began meeting in private Wednesday to discuss evidence investigators gained by bugging Peterson's phones.

Mark Geragos said Wednesday he wanted to hear 76 recorded conversations Peterson had with Kirk McAllister, his first lawyer in the case.

Geragos has asked the judge to throw out all wiretap-related evidence in the case, alleging investigators violated Peterson's right to attorney-client privilege when they listened to snippets of his conversations with McAllister.

On Wednesday, prosecutors called investigator Steven Jacobson to testify that he and others followed federal guidelines when they briefly monitored those calls.

Authorities tapped Peterson's phones from Jan. 10 until Feb. 4, 2003, Jacobson said, and bugged his cell phone again briefly from April 15-18.

It was during the latter span that the investigators' case rapidly developed -- the bodies of Laci Peterson and the couple's unborn son washed onto a San Francisco Bay shore and days later, police arrested Scott Peterson near San Diego.

If convicted, Peterson could face the death penalty. .....

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

Documents reveal more Peterson trips to bay

Scott Peterson attends a court session in Stanislaus County last month. THE BEE

By JOHN COTÉ

BEE STAFF WRITER

Last Updated: February 19, 2004, 08:22:09 PM PST

REDWOOD CITY - Scott Peterson returned to the Berkeley Marina area at least five times after his wife was reported missing Christmas Eve 2002, according to testimony and new documents entered as evidence in his trial. The documents revealed two previously undisclosed trips to the Berkeley shoreline and raise questions about the defense explanation for the treks.

They might also provide insight into the prosecution’s push to have evidence from satellite tracking devices admitted at trial.

During one of the newly revealed trips, Peterson drove along a frontage road just north of the marina on Jan. 27, then circled back before going to San Francisco International Airport about six hours later, according to the documents.

Peterson taped an interview with “Good Morning America” co-host Diane Sawyer that evening in Los Angeles in which he said he had “absolutely nothing” to do with his wife’s disappearance.

Peterson told police he launched his boat from the marina for a solo fishing trip the day his pregnant wife was reported missing.

He was arrested in April and charged with murdering her and their unborn son, Conner, shortly after their remains were found along the bay’s eastern shoreline. Both bodies were less than two miles from the spot where Peterson said he fished.

A detective testified at Peterson’s preliminary hearing in November that police tailed the Modesto man to the marina three times: Jan. 5, 6 and 9, 2003. On those occasions, Peterson stopped briefly and looked out at the water, Detective Al Brocchini said.

Satellite tracking devices police covertly installed on at least three vehicles Peterson drove indicate he also went to the marina Jan. 26 and 27, 2003, using different vehicles for each of those trips, according to documents filed in San Mateo County Superior Court.

Defense attorney Mark Geragos suggested during the 31-year-old Peterson’s preliminary hearing that the first three trips were prompted by Bee articles that ran on or near those days indicating police would be searching the bay waters for Peterson’s missing wife, Laci.

“Were you aware that on the morning of Jan. 5, before Mr. Peterson went to the San Francisco Bay, that there was an article in The Modesto Bee saying, ‘Dogs and divers go to work in the San Francisco Bay?’” Geragos asked Brocchini.

Brocchini said he wasn’t sure about the date.

“If there was that article, it certainly wouldn’t look that suspicious, would it?” Geragos said. He later pointed to a similar article that ran Jan. 9.

But there were no Bee articles Jan. 26 or 27 referencing bay search efforts. Geragos could not be reached for comment Thursday.

John Goold, a prosecution spokesman, declined to comment, citing a gag order in the case that forbids discussing evidence.

“For me to drawn any conclusions, I’d be commenting on the evidence,” Goold said.

Goold also declined to say if the two trips in late January were part of the prosecution’s reasoning for seeking to use global positioning system evidence at trial. The defense opposed the move, arguing that the evidence was unreliable.

Judge Alfred Delucchi ruled Tuesday the evidence could be used at trial........

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

No decision on whether bugged calls allowed

By GARTH STAPLEY and JOHN COTÉ
BEE STAFF WRITERS

Last Updated: February 19, 2004, 11:55:36 AM PST

REDWOOD CITY -- Wiretap testimony in Scott Peterson's trial Wednesday focused on nuts and bolts of how phone bugs work, except for one spirited exchange when defense attorney Mark Geragos threatened to call a prosecutor to the witness stand.

Judge Alfred Delucchi, however, twice shot down the idea.

Seeking to have an opposing attorney testify is unusual, legal observers said.

"There is a reluctance, a reticence, to call the actual attorneys in a case," Los Angeles defense attorney Bradley Brunon said. "I would have been real surprised if the judge granted that."

Geragos wanted to ask prosecutor Rick Distaso -- under oath -- about meetings involving officers who monitored Peterson's phone calls, Distaso and Stanislaus County Superior Court Judge Wray Ladine, who approved the bugging.

Geragos already has subpoenaed Ladine because no stenographer was present to record the meetings.

Ruth Jones, a professor at McGeorge School of Law in Sacramento and former New York City prosecutor, said investigator Steven Jacobson's testimony regarding the meetings should be sufficient.

Geragos' desire to put Distaso on the stand could be a tactic to keep his opponent off balance, Brunon said.

"There's probably some gamesmanship going on," Brunon said.

"Mark doesn't want to make their job any easier than it is," Jones said. "He's going to make a lot of motions, and he's going to lose many of them. But that's his job, to make motions."

Wednesday, Delucchi called a recess at 11:02 a.m. to listen to some recordings of calls challenged by Geragos. The judge also invited Jacobson, Peterson and his attorneys into his chambers.

They didn't emerge until after lunch, when attorneys on both sides met first with the judge behind closed doors, then privately with each other and again with the judge before he announced at 3:52 p.m. that the session would not reconvene until this morning.

All participants are bound by a court-imposed gag order from revealing what was discussed in the meetings.

Jacobson was the only witness called Wednesday, and he spent most of his time explaining phone bugging.

Peterson's two cell phones were tapped from Jan. 10 through Feb. 4, Jacobson said, and again from April 13 until his arrest April 18. Jacobson said he called off the first tap because it wasn't producing evidence........

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

Does anyone know if the hair that was found was even human?? Wouldn't it be the kicker if the hair was either MacKenzie's or the cat Snott liked to kick??

OH! OH! Another thought. If the hair is human, couldn't Laci have picked it up at the salon where Snott had his haircut on the 23rd....after all, she WAS in the same clothes....

Scotty kicked cats? Well, any remaining charity I had in my heart has fled. :)

LOL.... wouldn't ya think....

A member from Modesto area, posting on Court TV, has some interesting insights being the member was a legal secretary and seems to know the attorney/legal system games. Was some good reading for the short time I could browse... At work now.. lurk on/off today... ;o)

oh yeah, I think if I remembered right, other people came to take his animals during the search, coz ol scotty couldn't care for them... ;o)

Go ahead Snott, make my day!!

Yes, that's certainly a thought... for that matter, if the hair had been Scott's, Scott could try to explain it away by saying, "Laci had a couple of Scott's hairs on her clothes, not unusual given that she lived with him in that house..."

Come to think of it, Jackie, suppose the hair WAS Amber's, that would be a lot harder for Scott to explain. Amber was never in Scott's and Laci's house; Amber and Laci never met; if a piece of Amber's hair appeared there, seems like one could conclude that it fell off Scott's clothes--which would of course tend to prove that Scott had contact with the duct tape that was around Laci.

Oh, GOODNESS GRACIOUS! There goes the half-baked explanation that Scott drove to the Berkeley Marina just "because the Modesto Bee had articles about the search in the Bay." Try again, Gergasbag.

Yes, and he used a different vehicle each time BECAUUUSE................ ?

FOFLMAO! Hey stranger.

3/1 GLOBE COVER STORY: SCOTT PETERSON LIES EXPOSED!

HIS BIZARRE BEHAVIOR TIPPED COPS THAT HE WAS GUILTY FROM GET-GO!

SYNOPSIS

Scott Peterson's peculiar actions after his wife went missing sent up red flags, quickly changing the cops heartfelt sympathy for the young husband, into suspicion that he was a cold blooded killer.

Scott left a message on Laci's cell phone at 2:15 p.m. on the day that she vanished, telling her he was leaving the marina after his fishing trip. But it was well known among her friends and family that Laci's cell phone battery was dead and had been for weeks.

Detective Brocchini knew Laci's cell phone battery was dead as early as Christmas Eve, because he had examined the phone and taken messages off it. "If the cell phone had been dead for weeks, why had Scott left a message on it on Christmas Eve, that started with the words, "Hey, beautiful?", asks a source close to the case. "Brocchini figured it was highly suspicious.

"Was the message part of Scott's alibi, left for the benefit of LE whom he knew would listen to it after Laci disappeared?" "Did he know Laci would never hear it anyway because she was already dead?" Brocchini was concerned enough to record the conversation in his report.

Just 24 hours after his pregnant wife disappeared, Scott hosted his parents for turkey dinner on Christmas Day at his home in Modesto. He also invited next door neighbor Karen Servas, who had found McKenzie running loose near her home on X-mas Eve. She turned him down because she is a vegetarian, but a calm and cool Scott called her a few minutes later to tell her he was also making tortellini. "The only other guests at Scott's house where his parents, Jackie and Lee, who unlike their son seemed "very upset."

After some small talk, Scott left the table, opened a bottle of wine and began cooking the tortellini -- which the neighbor found bizarre seeing as though his pregnant wife was missing. "Karen told LE, he was acting like everything was fine," says the source. "She couldn't believe it. "During the meal, he told his parents several times that he'd volunteered to take a polygraph test, but that police had advised him he was "too emotional" and shouldn't do it. Later he said he couldn't take a polygraph because too much time had passed since the disappearance.

"Police were more than surprised when Karen told them. The truth was, they'd been trying without success to get Scott to take one." Karen says that from the look in Scott's eyes and his demeanor, she was so scared of him that she fled her home and stayed with friends.

Scott's stonewalling and curious behavior practically screamed out that he was a prime suspect. When police went to the warehouse with him, to photograph the boat he'd been fishing in, Scott suddenly blurted out "Don't let my boss see that." He obviously meant that he didn't want his boss to know he stored his boat in the company warehouse. "Brocchini made a mental note that it seemed like a very odd thing for someone to be worrying about when his wife was missing."

Another officer, Deputy Chris Boyer, who was in charge of the bloodhound tracking team, was left speechless when he wanted to take a pink slipper, a hairbrush and a pair of Laci's sunglasses to give his dogs a scent to track her and Scott demanded a receipt for them.

"Boyer later told colleagues that in 20 years of experience, it was the first time anyone had asked for a receipt for something that could help find a missing person."

And while trying to corroborate the Christmas Eve fishing trip, Det. Grogan had alarms go off in his head when Scott refused to give him his debt card number to check out his gas purchase at a filling station. "A few days later Scott gave Grogan a piece of paper with the Chevron station location and the amount $13.08 handwritten by himself and still refused to give Grogan his card number" said a source.

On one occasion, cops found witnesses who thought they had seen Laci walking the dog at the time Scott said she had gone out. But instead of being elated by someone who might help find his wife, the source reveals, Scott said, "It wasn't Laci. She doesn't walk that way."

Adds the source, cops were forced to ask themselves, "Did Scott dismiss the sighting because he KNEW she never walked in the park that day?"

LE also had doubts about Scott from his interaction with other witnesses. Stacey Boyers, a close friend of Laci visited Scott on Christmas Day and while she was there, he spent an unusual amount of time vacuuming, especially around the couch, armchairs, and washer and dryer. "No one had ever accused Scott of being a 'clean freak' and Stacy thought it was very weird that he was calmly vacuuming, while Laci's family and friends were joing the police in searching for her.

On Jan. 9, 2003, Laci had been missing for 16 days. Bishop Bergstrom, 57, a volunteer searcher, asked Scott if there where any new leads. Says the source, "In a flat, cold tone and with an odd smile on his face, Scott told him, 'No- I doubt they'll ever find her."

Laci's Mom, was also puzzled by Scott, when she over heard him tell someone that Connor's due date was Feb. 10, says the source. "She asked Scott when it had changed and Scott didn't say a word, he just looked at her."

According to a source Scott also told Sharon that he last saw Laci sitting in a chair with a beautiful smile on her face, combing her hair. "She looked very cute." But Scott told police and others that "Laci was mopping the kitchen floor when he left."

Finally, as police were trying to keep the case in the public eye, they got a video from Laci's Mom to pass clips along to media. But Scott forbade them to use any shots of him, and they figured out why when they saw the tape, which was dated Dec. 21, 2001, a year to the day before Laci disappeared. "In the video, Laci has someone's baby and asks Scott to hold it," says the source. "He says, 'This isn't much fun.'

The detectives looked at each other, "From Scott's own mouth had come confirmation of something the had heard from his own friends-Scott wasn't happy about his own impending fatherhood."

courtesty Rickamorti at Purgatory

Atwater woman questioned by Modesto police as trial proceeds in Redwood City

Friday, February 20, 2004

- The Modesto Bee
By Mike Conway and Garth Stapley

An Atwater woman says Modesto police questioned her Wednesday in connection with the deaths of Laci Peterson and her unborn, even as Scott Peterson’s murder trial is about to get under way.

The contact came the same day that Peterson’s attorney, in a Redwood City courtroom, berated authorities for withholding information that he said could clear his client.

The 30-year-old Atwater woman, who asked to remain anonymous, said Modesto police Detective Ray Coyle called to ask her where she was on Dec. 31, 2002 - one week after 27-year-old Laci Peterson was reported missing. “He asked if I knew Laci Peterson.”

Stanislaus County Chief Deputy District Attorney John Goold said Thursday that he could not confirm whether police continue to follow leads in the case, which was moved from Modesto to San Mateo County because of crushing media attention.

“I’m sure if there still is remaining investigation to do, they’re going to be out there doing it,” Goold said. “If they stop, the defense will complain that they stopped.”

The Atwater woman said she briefly lived in South Modesto in 2000 but didn’t know Scott or Laci Peterson.

The detective told her, “’Your name is one of the ones that came up,’” the woman said. “He said there were 300 people he had to check.”

The woman produced pay stubs indicating she was working in Texas on Dec. 31, 2002. The woman said she moved to Texas in June 2002 and didn’t return to Atwater until April.

She said she has no idea why authorities contacted her. She said Coyle told her some people he was checking were required to register with authorities because of convictions for certain sex crimes.

The woman admitted being a heavy drug user in the past with a history of auto theft. She said she was convicted of misdemeanor charges of annoying or molesting a child under 18, which requires her to check in regularly with police.

She said she served time in the Merced County Jail and in the women’s prison in Chowchilla, but none of her offenses was a violent crime.

“They better look at all the people with violent records,” she said. “I think they’re fishing for different people. I do have a record, but not that bad.”

The woman said Coyle asked if she would take a lie detector test regarding her whereabouts Dec. 31, 2002, and she said she would.

“I don’t have a problem with that,” she said.

The conversation ended without arranging a polygraph, she said.

The significance of Dec. 31 to the investigation remains unclear. More than a thousand people gathered that evening for a candlelight vigil for the missing mother-to-be, including her husband.

The day before, Scott Peterson’s girlfriend contacted police for the first time and agreed to cooperate with their investigation. Amber Frey, a Fresno massage therapist, said she didn’t know Peterson was married when they began dating in late November 2002, learning the truth in news reports.

Scott Peterson, 31, has pleaded not guilty to charges of killing his wife and their unborn son. He faces the death penalty if convicted.

Peterson’s lawyer, Mark Geragos, complained passionately Wednesday, saying authorities only this week handed over hundreds of pages of documents that he should have been given long ago.

Geragos said the documents listed seven people connected to the case, one of whom could provide information clearing Scott Peterson of murder. Geragos did not name any of the people, saying he did not want to run afoul of a gag order preventing trial participants from talking about evidence.

http://www.mercedsun-star.com/news/newsview.asp?c=96488

Maybe that list of 300 was a list of Registered Sex offenders in the area that they were just rechecking. I still can't see that MPD would be that irresponsible that they would not check every CREDIBLE lead. This is a very high profile case, the Nation/World is watching. I don't think they would want to be liable for wrongful prosecution, negligence while investigating, or wasting the taxpayers money pursuing a case against a man wrongfully accused.

I wonder if MPD didn't bother to follow up on "female" sex offenders?

Maybe that's why LE contacted her, maybe MG questioned why they didn't. But why ask her her whereabouts on Dec. 31? I'm searching my mind for a connection.

Is the courtroom dark today, or are they in??

I believe they go back in session Monday...

""Peterson’s lawyer, Mark Geragos, complained passionately Wednesday, saying authorities only this week handed over hundreds of pages of documents that he should have been given long ago.

Geragos said the documents listed seven people connected to the case, one of whom could provide information clearing Scott Peterson of murder. Geragos did not name any of the people, saying he did not want to run afoul of a gag order preventing trial participants from talking about evidence.""

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<Complained, and states there are at least 7 others identified possible connected? Geeish, Geragos, produce them, fess up! ;o)<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

Geragos said the documents listed seven people connected to the case, one of whom could provide information clearing Scott Peterson of murder.

Fieger laughed at that statement and said that if this were indeed fact, MG would have filed a flurry of motions to free his client by now!