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 ...
I avoided that other big thread! LOL
Too busy with work and kids being home these days to properly keep up with this case. As of tonight, I think I'm up to date though!
The thing is that if Geragos throws out enough different theories, no matter how questionable, they will negate the circumstancial evidence againt Scott
I will be absolutely outraged if this guy goes free. I will feel the same way I did after Clinton was re-elected.
How true!
I think you're remembering something from Brent's or Amy's testimony. I think Amy left her car at Scott's and Laci's. Then I think she was with all of them either out at the park or at the copy store making missing posters, or maybe even at the police station, so she had to be driven back to get her car. Seems to me she had a brother with her (not Brent, but a brother who was someone who had the same mother as Amy.)
Oh, NOOO, Vel, you don't understand, see, Kim became infatuated by the alluring Scott BEFORE she actually had the privilege of meeting him! So, see, she had her ex-boyfriend's Hawaiian roommates kill Laci and hide the body, knowing that a search center would be set up, and that she could hang out there to bask in Scott's presence!
See, we really need to e-mail Mr. Geragos so he can explain these things to us.
LOLOL! Boy, and we think WE'RE busy! "Hey, can I pencil in a kidnapping here, or is the day too full already?"
I don't know how they know she was killed in the home, but I do remember when it appeared that they may have reached that conclusion. Let's see, their last searches of the home were about Feb. 18, 19, of 2003. Then, around the first week of March, the police actually called a press conference and announced very pointedly that, in spite of the fact that no body had been found, they were now sure that they were dealing with a HOMICIDE, not just a missing person case.
My guess is he got the $10,000 in cash from Mommy and Daddy... and Janey.
LOL, we shouldn't e-mail Hammer, he already appears to be suffering from delusions of grandeur, from being a Big TV Celebrity.
I just read your explanation of when the Ocean Enhancement has to be purchased. Cancel my question regarding, if Scott went through the Bay and continued out into the ocean! I see that the Ocean Enhancement applies to an area 250 miles away!
He still criticized the prosecution, but seemed much less puffed up..
Let's just PRAY that Scott takes the stand on Election Day, as O.J. did in 1994--which resulted in a magnified landslide for the GOP in grabbing 54 House seats--because all the chicks (and especially blacks) stayed home riveted to their TVs.
Hey, wait a minute! Now we've seen that the Dec. 23--24 fishing license has the year of 2003 on it, when it was supposedly issued in 2002, and we're speculating that the clerk just made a mistake.....what if that license really WAS bought in 2003? Perhaps... to back up an alibi that "I was out fishing when she disappeared, honest"? And back dated for Dec. 23-24? When did Scott first show this fishing license to the police?
Now that we know that (apparently) Amber was trying to slip around and not tell the police about EVERY time she talked to Scott--when in fact she'd promised to tell them about every time--it becomes very clear why she suddenly needed an attorney!
Why WOULD a guy have saved his old 2-day fishing licenses, even one that was 3 years old at the time, in a little clear bag in his glove compartment?
I've never saved a fishing license, after using it up,so to speak.
He had the marina receipt for the 24th so it really doesn't matter...they consider it legit....probably have a record of it at Big 5
Well, there's another thing. This kind of reminds me of those English mystery stories, where they say things like, "He remembered to wipe his feet, so as not to soil the carpet, as he dragged the body into the house." This attention to small details. I mean, if we assume that his real only purpose in going out "fishing" was to dump the evidence of his MURDER, then why was he so careful to be all "legal" about everything?
I mean, a ticket for fishing without a license would have been just as good a proof that he was out there, as a license would.
(Now, a ticket for dumping a body without a license, that would have been problematic...)
Well...I guess he wouldn't want to be caught breaking the law, now would he?
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.