Haggling Over Evidence in Peterson Trial

The Guardian ^ | 3/01/2004 | Brian Skoloff

[runningbear]

Haggling Over Evidence in Peterson Trial

Haggling Over Evidence in Peterson Trial

Monday March 1, 2004 10:46 AM

By BRIAN SKOLOFF

Associated Press Writer

REDWOOD CITY, Calif. (AP) - Just days before jury selection is set to begin, attorneys in Scott Peterson's double-murder trial continue to haggle over the admissibility of evidence.

Judge Alfred A. Delucchi has already made several key rulings in the case, including a decision to allow prosecutors to use evidence police gathered with electronic devices used to track Peterson after his wife disappeared.

But still at issue is the admissibility of monitored phone calls, which was set to be the topic when court hearings resume Monday. Peterson is charged in the deaths of his pregnant wife, Laci, and their unborn son.

Peterson attorney Mark Geragos was prepared to challenge the wiretap evidence, which was gathered by police in the weeks after Laci Peterson's disappearance. Geragos claims investigators violated Scott Peterson's attorney-client privilege when they listened to bits of conversations with his first attorney, Kirk McAllister.

During the first months of 2003, investigators monitored about 3,000 calls Peterson made or received, including 76 between the former fertilizer salesman and his first attorney.

With both sides bound by a gag order, it's unclear exactly what evidence prosecutors plan to use from the wiretaps, but authorities have maintained they followed all federal guidelines when using the listening devices.

The bodies of Laci Peterson and the baby washed ashore in April along the shores of San Francisco Bay, not far from where Scott Peterson claims he was fishing on the day his wife vanished - Christmas Eve, 2002.

Jury selection is scheduled to begin Thursday, with court officials summoning 200 potential jurors for questioning.

In other crucial decisions, Delucchi ruled last week that only one jury will be seated for the trial and that panelists will not be sequestered. Geragos had sought two juries - one to decide guilt or innocence and one to levy a sentence if Peterson is convicted. He could face the death penalty.

Delucchi has yet to rule on what could be the most damaging ...........

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

House Passes Unborn Victims Of Violence Act

House Passes Unborn Victims Of Violence Act

( ABP) -- The U.S. House of Representatives voted Feb. 26 to treat an attack on a pregnant woman as two separate crimes against her and the fetus she is carrying. Critics say the bill would undermine abortion rights by giving fetuses new legal status.

The measure would be applicable only to federal crimes, such as terrorism or drug trafficking. But supporters said Congress needs to bring federal law in line with state statutes. Twenty-nine states already have laws that recognize crimes against fetuses.

Passage of the Unborn Victims of Violence Act is backed by President Bush and conservative religious groups. It is the major legislative objective of abortion opponents this year, after Congress banned partial-birth abortions last year. A similar bill awaits action in the Senate. Although the House has twice passed bills recognizing crimes against fetuses, the Senate has yet to do so.

Bush urged the Senate to follow the House's lead. "Pregnant women who have been harmed by violence, and their families, know that there are two victims -- the mother and the unborn child -- and both victims should be protected by federal law," he said in a statement.

Before passing the bill 254-163, House members easily rejected a Democratic substitute that would have increased penalties for attacks on pregnant women in which the fetus is injured or killed without recognizing the fetus as a victim. .........

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

Demographics less important than attitudes in Peterson jury

Posted on Sun, Feb. 29, 2004

Demographics less important than attitudes in Peterson jury

KIM CURTIS

Associated Press

REDWOOD CITY, Calif. - Attitudes about the death penalty and extramarital affairs may be more important than demographics when it comes to picking a jury for Scott Peterson's double-murder trial, experts say.

Jury selection is slated to begin later this week, as the first 200 questionnaires are handed out to San Mateo County residents. After the judge dismisses people for hardship reasons, the next step will be further questioning, or voir dire. Jurors will be questioned one by one in the courtroom by lawyers and Judge Alfred A. Delucchi.

"Demographics are not the controlling factors," said Lois Heaney of the San Francisco-based National Jury Project, the nation's oldest trial consulting firm. "It's people's attitudes, their life experiences, what life has taught them."

Authorities allege Peterson, 31, murdered his pregnant wife, Laci, in their Modesto home on Dec. 24, 2002 because he was having an affair with a massage therapist, then drove her body to San Francisco Bay and dumped it overboard from his boat.

On Monday, attorneys will continue arguing over the admissibility of wiretap evidence gathered in the weeks after Laci Peterson's disappearance.

In addition to age, occupation, marital status and other demographic data, prosecutors and defense lawyers will ask potential jurors on the 30-page questionnaire whether they've had an extramarital affair, how they feel about people who have affairs, whether they've ever lost a child or been a victim of a violent crime, whether they've ever considered a career in law enforcement and if they own a gun.

"The prosecution is looking for people who are more conservative, more conventional and who are deeply, personally offended by things like people having an affair," Heaney said.

Prosecutors also will likely favor "authoritarians," or judgmental people who tend to discriminate, according to David Graeven, president of the San Francisco-based Trial Behavior Consulting. "They're very black and white. They tend to follow authority. They respect that which is above them, but not what's below them."

However, people who work in the hard sciences, such as engineers, would be ideal for the defense, Graeven said.

"Engineers rely on evidence," he said, adding that the prosecution has an extremely high burden of proof in a double-murder capital case.

The defense also wants jurors with "a high tolerance for ambiguity," Heaney said. "People who can tolerate just not knowing if the prosecution can't prove his guilt."

On the other hand, prosecutors want people who say "good enough," she said. "There's enough smoke here."

In most capital cases, the real issue isn't guilt, but whether to sentence the defendant to death, said Edward Bronson, who teaches at Chico State University and has studied juries for 40 years.

"There are exceptions, and this arguably is going to be one," Bronson said. "A lot of the evidence is kind of hokey. Some of it's barely admissible. This could be a close case on guilt."

Defense lawyer Mark Geragos failed in his attempt to empanel two separate juries - one to determine guilt and another to impose sentencing. Now, all 12 jurors and six alternates will need to proclaim their willingness to sentence a person to death.

That means trouble for the defense, experts agree.

Talking to people about the death penalty before the person is convicted, means "placing in people's minds that he's guilty," Heaney said.

And the more questions you ask, and the more you talk about the death penalty, "the worse it gets for the defense," Bronson said. "This is an absolutely atypical capital case. This ain't no Charles Manson. He's white, he's middle class ... This isn't what you typically find.".......

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

DEVELOPMENTS:

Posted on Fri, Feb. 27, 2004

DEVELOPMENTS:

Judge Alfred Delucchi denied a defense request Thursday to sequester the jury for the six-month trial. He also denied a defense motion to select two juries, one for the guilt phase and one for the penalty phase.

The supervisor of a dog handler testified that Laci Peterson's sunglasses used by the dogs to recognize Laci's her scent were not contaminated by Scott Peterson's scent from his brown slipper.........

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

Wiretap, dog tracking evidence to be challenged by defense

Wiretap, dog tracking evidence to be challenged by defense

Redwood City, California-AP -- Attorneys in Scott Peterson's murder trial will be back in court today to haggle over what can be admitted as evidence.

One issue is the wiretapping of three-thousand phone calls. Peterson's attorney says investigators violated attorney-client privilege when they listened to calls between Peterson and his first lawyer. Authorities say they followed federal guidelines when using the listening devices.

The judge has yet to rule on evidence from police who say tracking dogs picked up Laci Peterson's scent on her husband's boat and at a marina. Laci Peterson's......

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

The People of the State of California vs Scott Lee Peterson

[Devil_Anse]

I think you're absolutely right about the reason they mention banking/finance expertise on the questionnaire.

As for handwriting analysis, the only kind that is even accepted as a serious science is that which tends to prove whether a particular person wrote a particular document or signature. This business about trying to determine a person's character traits from his handwriting is pop science, nothing more--and so, couldn't be evidence in a trial. Furthermore, a defendant's character may not be discussed in a trial unless the DEFENDANT raises the issue, and trying to show good character is always a risky proposition, so it is seldom done. No way do I think the defense plans to provide evidence of good character on the part of Scott.

The fingerprinting questions... we just don't know, but it sure will be great when we find out! That sort of evidence can only be detrimental to Scott! (Maybe they found Scott's fingerprints on Amber.)

On the firearms questions, I guess you're right. Since everything, nowadays, is politicized, I guess the question of whether he owns a gun or guns is something that would affect a California jury... it might make some of them not like him!

Then there is the question of drugs. Maybe I was too hasty when I dismissed the idea that Scott slipped Laci some GHB that night. I abandoned that idea b/c I heard the med examiner didn't find it in her remains, but who knows? There wasn't much left of the poor girl; who knows, maybe he DID order GHB on the computer, and maybe they found some of it in the house.

Or maybe a drug expert is gonna discuss Viagra!

[RGSpincich]

lots of middle aged, pony-tailed guys driving around in their beat up old vans with bumper stickers. I live in what is known as Berkeley East,

Grizzley Peak, no doubt. I'm in El Sobrante East and see those same anti-Bush bumper stickers all over the Bay area.

[Devil_Anse]

Thanks for the cite. I just read the questionnaire.

I was amused that they asked if the juror candidate watched Greta VS, Larry King, or Geraldo. (How long has it been since Geraldo featured this case??)

Perhaps they should have added a question like this: "If you have watched any of the above cable shows, did you happen to catch any of the ones where attorney Mark Geragos said the defendant didn't have a chance, or where said attorney expressed an opinion that the defendant did these murders?"

[William Terrell]

Why should there be any evidence needed. Anyone just looking at the pictures of Scott knows he's guilty. I mean, that dead pan face and smirk on his lying lips! They just oughta deem him guilty and save everybody a lot of time, so we can bring closure to Laci and her poor, sweet, dead baby!

[Jackie-O]

Remember the report of the questioning of SP when they asked him to be tested for gunshot residue, and he asked if he would test positive if he ran an outboard motor???
May that's the possible firearms testimony...maybe Snott tested positive for gunshot residue????
Thanks for that report Lynn, great stuff, maybe a little peek into the State's case.

[Canadian Outrage]

I agree WT but that's not unfortunately the way the justice system works. I would have NOT ONE problem convicting him to death, TODAY!!

[Canadian Outrage]

#343 - It would be very tempting to ask the prospective Jurors if they saw Geragos creaming his own client!! LOL

[Devil_Anse]

Gosh, I never thought of it that way! We need more deep thinkers on these shallow threads.

[Devil_Anse]

Also, remember how they said at the prelim that, in spite of their having tested him for that, they had never even gotten the results??

[Jackie-O]

Well lookie here! Someone finally showed up!
Morning Dev!
I wonder why there were no results. Who said at the pre-lin that there were none? Pros or MG??

[Devil_Anse]

It was Brocchini. He said that yes, they'd done the swab of Scott's hand, but that he'd never picked up the results from the lab--or the lab had never delivered the results, or something like that. It sounded really strange.

[Lucy Lake]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,113700,00.html

REDWOOD CITY, Calif. — Defense attorneys in Scott Peterson's (search) double-murder trial told a judge Tuesday they believe too many prospective jurors already have concluded their client is guilty and, among other possible remedies, may seek a second move for the trial.
"The prejudgment rate ... is at a level where the court needs to take some action," Peterson lawyer Mark Geragos (search) told the judge.

Geragos said he would file a motion Monday "asking for one of three remedies."

He said he would seek either a change of venue out of San Mateo County (search), to have the judge revisit the issue of having two juries — one for the guilt phase and one for the penalty phase — or for the defense to be given an additional number of challenges to dismiss unwanted potential jurors.

[onyx]

I saw that and it makes me mad. Another Geragos trick.

[pinz-n-needlez]

Very interesting, thanks for posting.

We've been traveling, so I have a lot of reading to catch up on.

I wander over to CTV some evenings when things are quiet here. It gets brutal sometimes. I like life here. :-)

Pinz

[Lucy Lake]

LOL, this one?