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 ...
This makes me INSANE!
Got him to admit? Brocchini handed over his notes AND his audiotape.......how is that "getting him" to admit?
And nowhere did Brocchini say he DELIBERATELY deleted them; he just said he didn't put them in there.
It was Geragos and the press who said he did it on purpose.
IT MAKES ME CRAZY TOO!! The MEDIA - that is THEIR wording. It gives their headline a little punch when in fact it was NOTHING!! Honestly, I hope the viewership to CTV drops right off. After many many complaining emails of course.
Just heard a blurb on CTV...Kim McGregor, the wedding dress thief, has been presented as a viable suspect in Laci's murder. I have no details yet...She may be bipolar. Broncchini reviewing interview tape....Just another good muddying of the water IMHO...Geragos may go too far unless he can tie this together.... She wasn't truthful about her alibi.Beth reports
Beth say one writes in the date of his fishing license...so why was fishing trip called a last minute decision when he wrote in 23rd in addition to 24th...
True, but Beth fails to note they must write it in at time of purchase. One does not usually call a decision "last minute" if one has purchased a license to do so is my take.
Is Catherine Crier under the impression that she's a party to this case?
She's been making a lot of statements on her show lately AS FACT; for instance, she said that Scott went into the bathroom on Christmas Eve at the Rocha house, turned on the shower, and called Amber.
I don't even think they were AT the Rochas on Christmas Eve .....and I haven't heard of any phone calls between Scott and Amber on the 24th.
Unless she's getting this from Gloria, I have no clue where that stuff is coming from.
And that tells me he's got nothing to defend Scott with; now I know he doesn't have to prove anything, but it sure would help if anybody could account for Scott's whereabouts from 7:00 P.M. on the 23rd until 5:15 P.M. on the 24th.
Exactly!
MEG I agree. Geragos has had so many "theories" now that it is laughable. Any IDIOT can see what he's doing and IF they can see that, they most certainly should know by now that it's because he has NO DEFENSE. A DOZEN defenses just doesn't cut it.
#43
Yup I read it and I heard Beth Karas say that it was Sharon Rocha that said maybe Kim should be given a key so that she could walk McKenzie. From what Beth said Kimberly McGregor had a crush on Scott. I didn't hear anything in there that could possibly make Kim a suspect in committing the murder? HOW could she committ a murder like that and haul a bundle that size of a dead pregnant woman. It's just so damn stupid. I could tear my hair. I hope to God there are no jurors stupid enough to believe such nonsensical drivel. Sometimes I think we don't give Jurors enough credit. None of Geragos's theories go anywhere. They are just theories with NO supporting evidence as opposed to Snott boy!!
I have finally learned to take everything "sources " are reported to have "revealed" with a block of salt....There may be truth and rumor, fiction and fact all mixed together....The media prosecution bashing got almost hysterical...
I agree it was a huge mistake for Broncchini to not put that part of the witness information in his report because of the HUGE deal made out of it...NEVER let them see an opening.
They can come back on Geragos over that one tho Meg. That interview is STILL contained in another Detectives report and Geragos knows it. He also KNEW about this witness a year ago. ABSOLUTLEY NOTHING was witheld from him and I think the Prosecution on redirect is going to be able to score some REAL points on Geragos's less than honest behaviour. I have heard several TH's say that this may bite MG in the A$$!!
Well not those exact words LOL - "come back to haunt him" is what they really said.
It won't come back to discredit Geragos satisfactorily with me unless he is discredited in the eyes of the jurors and that I won't know for a long time...
It may discredit the MEDIA and THs, a pleasure to watch...Headlines will not change that have been written, words said by Michael Cordoza and Jim Hammer have still been said and they aren't going to turn around and bash themselves. Hope someone else will. I await the redirect.
Good point. I often wonder "how" they pick the talking heads they do. Cardoza raises my hackles before he even opens his mouth. I would like to reach inside my TV screen and give him a knuck sandwich. Can't STAND the man. Jim Hammer totally disappoints me. He's a prosecutor and he got in trouble for breaking the rules that he knows very well. So now he's going to undermine another Prosecutor???? don't get it!!
If it means anything, that license was purchased on Dec. 20th at Big 5 in Modesto.
That doesn't sound very last minute to me!!
Well if it's any consolation, Gloria Allred says that anything Amber testifies to will be corroborated by unequivocal evidence. I suppose such as tapes and Peterson's OWN voice.
Yeah and WHEN IS THIS Judge going to SLAP DOWN the Peterson's???? Their yaps never stop.
I think Beth was trying to suggest that he could buy the license and fill in the dates later, so the 23rd date assumes a more suspicious thing...perhaps intimating he might get out on the bay the late evening of the 23rd?
As I understand it he had to write those dates in on the 20th in front of the clerk at Big 5. True, the spaces are empty for the dates, but the purchaser must write them at the time of purchase.
He premeditated fishing either the 23rd or the 24th..or..He premeditated the ability to go fishing so he could make a last minute decision?..
I am nitpicking the media and I like Beth..
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.