Laci and Scott Peterson
Posted on 06/28/2004 5:39:59 AM PDT by runningbear
TRIAL BY TELEVISION
By LINDA STASI
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Laci and Scott Peterson
June 28, 2004 -- ALMOST as riveting as an Ann Rule book, tonight's A&E special, "The Trial of Scott Peterson, (A Bill Curtis Special Report)," brings us up to the second on the case that has captured the nation.
How could it not?
On Christmas Eve, 2002, adorable "five-foot nothing," pregnant-as-can-be Laci Peterson took her dog for a walk. Whether she walked into the hands of a brutal stranger or was already dead at the hands of her loving husband, Scott, is the question now facing the six women and six men jurors.
(This number is not counting, of course, the country's newest media star, bounced juror Justin Falconer who was thrown off for violating jury ethics. Why haven't they charged him with contempt, by the way — instead of letting him be flown around the country to appear on more talk shows than Bill Clinton?) .........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peterson prosecution faces uphill climb
Article Published: Sunday, June 27, 2004 - 7:28:54 PM PST
Peterson prosecution faces uphill climb
By Brian Skoloff
Associated Press
REDWOOD CITY, Calif. -- As Scott Peterson's double-murder trial enters its second month, many courtroom observers say the prosecution's case appears to be faltering.
Defense attorney Mark Geragos has used several prosecution witnesses to make his case that the investigation which led to charges Peterson killed his pregnant wife was shoddily executed and designed from the start to implicate Peterson.
Geragos was scheduled to resume his cross examination today of Detective Allen Brocchini, the first investigator assigned to the report that Laci Peterson had vanished. Last week, Geragos got Brocchini to admit to several investigative lapses.
"It's still a horse race.........
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peterson's prosecutors watch trial go downhill
Despite bad week, it's too early to panic, experts say
Harriet Chiang, Chronicle Legal Affairs Writer
Sunday, June 27, 2004
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Prosecutors have been thrown off kilter by their own witnesses. A juror who was excused blasted their case.
Sure, it's been a rough week for prosecutors in the Scott Peterson double- murder trial in Redwood City, but that's no reason to panic, say legal experts. It's still early in a case that's expected to last months.
"I'm sure the prosecutor has realized that he hasn't come close to proving his case,'' said former San Francisco prosecutor Bill Fazio. "But he should start getting his act together........
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Associated Press
REDWOOD CITY, Calif. June 25, 2004 — Police said Friday that Scott Peterson's lawyer tried to give jurors the false impression that authorities investigating the death of his pregnant wife conspired to hide a sympathetic witness.
During his questioning Thursday of Detective Allen Brocchini, defense lawyer Mark Geragos got the man to concede that he failed to record a witness who recalled seeing Laci Peterson at the warehouse where her husband stored his small boat the same boat prosecutors claim Scott Peterson hid from his wife so he could use it later to dispose of her body.
Sgt. Ed Steele, a spokesman for the Modesto police department, said Friday that officials detailed that account in other reports provided to the defense. He said Geragos was trying to mislead the jury..........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Police say so-called missing details provided to Peterson defense
Police say so-called missing details provided to Peterson defense
BRIAN SKOLOFF, Associated Press Writer
Friday, June 25, 2004
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(06-25) 13:43 PDT REDWOOD CITY, Calif. (AP) --
Modesto police said Friday that Scott Peterson's lawyer tried to trick the jury into believing authorities conspired to hide a sympathetic witness when, in fact, police detailed the account in reports provided to the defense.
It was a blow in the short-term to the prosecution's double-murder case against Peterson because it looked like a detective intentionally deleted the witness account from his report after realizing it didn't fit with their theory that Peterson killed his pregnant wife.
But it may now work in the prosecution's favor as the trial trudges on into its second month, experts said Friday.
During his questioning Thursday of Modesto police Detective Allen Brocchini, defense lawyer Mark Geragos got the man to concede he failed to record a witness who recalled seeing Laci Peterson at the warehouse where her husband stored his small boat -- the same boat prosecutors claim Scott Peterson hid from his wife so he could use it later to dispose of her body.........
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
Good grief...RG is right I need to clean my glasses or get new ones..I can't read the rest but the license is for 2003...must have run out of 2002 licenses at the end of Dec...Consider my entire posts concerning license false, lack of sufficient information...inadequate representation. I apologize.
I just watched the A&E special. They made a point of saying that the prosecution believes that Laci was killed in the home. I wonder how they know that? If there is no forensic evidence. Just curious.
They assume she was strangled?...They believe she was killed when getting undressed the night of the 23rd?
>>They assume she was strangled?...They believe she was killed when getting undressed the night of the 23rd?<,
They didn't say assume, they said BELIEVE.
No apologies necessary. ;~)
One more question....
If Scott was in such a bad way financially, where did he get the $10,000 in cash that he had when he was arrested?
Well, we'll never know as her head is missing and the body so decomposed...Suffocation doesn't leave forensics, either....I can believe without definite proof by other information that is available. See my #161. That and the information about his capture is all I need....
Amber is an interesting addition...his marriage wasn't "glorious", he wasn't what he seemed to be before Lacis disappearance or after(character stuff..and motive to be footloose, free of child support, etc)
Assumed from the country club in Modesto buying back his membership.
Thanks!!
Glad to see you here!
Yes, I managed to catch Greta's brief segment--or rather, brief screaming match--on the case tonight.
I noticed that ex-DA Hammer looked rather chastened and made reference to the fact that he personally holds the opinion that Scott did it. Heh.
Yes, I finally saw that segment which showed Ron and Sharon walking briskly along, and Ron said of Geragos, "If you can't dazzle 'em with brilliance, baffle 'em with bull!"
How nice of him to leave that last syllable off.
GO RON!!!!
I asked the question after hearing Hammer...OK, which one of you hammered Hammer with Emails!!?
Yes, that is an amazing number of calls. Their call pattern reminds me of how it was when I was 14 and for the first time a boy called me on the phone. He would call about 10 times an hour.
It seems that maybe there was something really interesting going on, true, but we have to think back to how Scott was acting in that time period, the few times the media managed to run after him and get a clip of him. He was very clearly HIDING. And I think he was hiding from the chance that Amber would see HIM on TV--HIM, the husband of the missing WIFE. So, for that reason, I don't think their conversations had any confidences from Scott about what he had just done.
Are you listening??
Come back here!!
That's what I think happened.
Wait! I went to that site you posted, the FAQ's on getting a CA fishing license.
What if Scott had gone out into SF Bay, but had wanted to possibly go beyond the Bay, and keep going, out into the ocean? I mean, maybe he was trying to be prepared for that eventuality.
Not that that boat would be safe to do that in, but then, that boat wasn't really all that safe for what he DID do, was it?
That the police wondered about Amber's credibility is no surprise to people who don't allow their emotions to rule how they view the facts. IOW, Amber does not walk on water.
That a supposedly innocent witness (Amber) needs her own attorney is also an indication that there is more to Amber than the public knows.
That's a great summary, thanks!!
Working from memory here, the Ocean Enhancement Stamp is only called for from Pt. Arguello south. Pt Arguello is about 250 miles south of the Golden Gate. It's not required just outside the GG.
But if the decision of what stamp was required was made by the clerk who issued the license, I'm sure an Ocean Enhancement Stamp seemed reasonable if somebody said they wanted to fish in the ocean. We're talking Big 5 here, probably not well versed on the fishing laws. Evidently our extreme outdoorsman wasn't up to snuff on them either.
No need to apologize. There's still something fishy about his license story!
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.