Posted on 09/13/2004 5:17:40 AM PDT by runningbear
September 13, 2004 -- REDWOOD CITY, Calif. — Scott Peterson's prosecutors are acting scared, spending more time trying to undermine anticipated defense testimony than on proving their own case, experts say.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
Peterson trial to resume with GPS testimony
REDWOOD CITY, Calif. - Prosecutors in Scott Peterson's murder trial are nearing the end of their case as they move into what is expected to be lengthy testimony about the former fertilizer salesman's movements in the days after his pregnant wife vanished.
The trial was set to resume Monday with two morning witnesses, followed by testimony about the global positioning satellite devices police placed on Peterson's vehicles so they could monitor his movements.
Prosecutors allege Peterson acted like a guilty man and lied to friends and family members about his whereabouts as a search was underway for his his wife, Laci. Defense lawyers maintain their client was trying to avoid media scrutiny........
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Detective work under fire again
He's been less-than-jokingly called the defense's best witness, this trial's Mark Fuhrman. And this week, Modesto police detective Al Brocchini managed to yet again find himself in the center of controversy in the Scott Peterson case.
On Wednesday, Christopher VanSandt testified that he was riding his bike through the park where Laci Peterson usually walked the couple's dog on the morning she was reported missing. He said he noticed a pregnant woman walking her dog there, but he later became convinced -- ``100 percent positive,'' he said -- that it wasn't Laci Peterson.......
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peterson trial to resume with GPS testimony
REDWOOD CITY, Calif. (AP) - Prosecutors in Scott Peterson's murder trial are nearing the end of their case as they move into what is expected to be lengthy testimony about the former fertilizer salesman's movements in the days after his pregnant wife vanished. The trial was set to resume Monday with two morning witnesses, followed by testimony about the global positioning satellite devices police placed on Peterson's vehicles so they could monitor his movements.
Prosecutors allege Peterson acted like a guilty man and lied to friends and family members about his whereabouts as a search was underway for his his wife, Laci. Defense lawyers maintain their client was trying to avoid media scrutiny.
Prosecutors are trying to prove that Peterson killed his eight-months pregnant wife on or around Dec. 24, 2002, then dumped her weighted body in San Francisco Bay.
The bodies of Laci Peterson and her fetus were found washed up from the bay in April 2003 not far from the Berkeley Marina, where Scott Peterson says he launched his boat that Christmas Eve morning for a solo fishing trip. He claims he returned home to find his wife gone.......
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Can The Unborn Be A Victim Of Crime?
The California case of Scott Peterson and the alleged murder of his wife Laci have rekindled some controversy that goes well beyond the facts involved in a typical murder case. Due to the fact that Laci Peterson was in the latter term of pregnancy at the time of her death, several issues have been raised concerning the unborn fetus. Before the pro-choice and pro life supporters start getting their dander up, let me first say that these issues are not necessarily the typical Rowe V. Wade arguments that we have heard on numerous occasions.
The question in this case, as is the question with many similar cases, is when does the unborn qualify as a crime victim. This question cannot be qualified under the standard "when does life begin" debate, but rather has to do with legal interpretations that are as different as night and day according to the jurisdictions concerned. In the United States, only twenty-eight states have criminalized harm to a fetus. For example, in the state of Georgia these laws take affect after 16 to 20 weeks of the pregnancy, but in Louisiana the laws take affect at any stage of pregnancy. In California, the laws come in to play after the embryonic stage, but in Alaska there is no law at all regarding harm to a fetus. As you can see, the laws that have been designed to protect an unborn fetus.......
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PINGING.......
PINGING.......
PINGING.......
I think I'm going to buy myself a new toy soon and name her "Diane" or "Sarah".
Thanks, RB!
*drool*
I'll file that one under "too good to be true". But we can always dream. I've gotten an 03 Springfield and an M1 from them this year and have been very happy with both. I live close enough to drive to pick up my orders, and walking through their warehouse is almost like torture.....
It was a premature case.
Obvious to me that they hadn't yet been able to produce irrefutable connected dots.
They should have waited and continued collection and analysis.
good mornin RB.....Let's hope this jury will know that b/c a guy kills his wife with no witnesses that this is NOT the perfect crime. That his efforts to find her are as telling as any piece of evidence, his money problems made this homicide more probable since he spent little time at home and needed the funds to carry out his affairs, as the facts reveal. These THs on tv can theorize all they want but I think it's all a case of envy, they would like to be as notorious as the attorneys in this case so they say anything that might draw some attention their way. The only one I really believe is Feiger, he already has his notoriety and has no ax to grind.
I think Scott's upbring w/o God in his life makes him a prime candidate for one who would kill his wife on Xmas eve....just another day to him but one that would keep most folks home with their families, so he could pull off this little caper.
The NY Post's staff writer, Breuer, includes quotes from two L.A. attorneys, colleagues (and possibly neighbors) of Geragos.
There is no doubt that, after Geragos tried to put on evidence of witnesses who say they "saw" Laci walking the dog in the neighborhood on Dec. 24, it would be very powerful for the prosecution to then (in rebuttal) pull out these female dog-walkers--especially the one who looked strikingly like Laci.
But that does not mean that presenting them in this odd way--during the case in chief--is fatal to the prosecution's case. Not at all.
Geragos himself has also done a lot of anticipating of the state's evidence. I still wonder why he asked Shawn Sibley about "Famous" Jackson. We waited to see what "aha!" that would lead to. So far, nothing. And how exactly would bringing "Famous" Jackson into the scheme of things change this case? I can't see where it would. Mark couldn't seem to wait his turn. Wonder why he was so anxious. Gosh, maybe he's afraid he'll lose.
mornin Dev...I definately agree that these attorneys are trying to take the wind out of the sails of their opponents with everything they do, whether it makes sense to anyone else. I think the prosecution is anticipating anything Geragross might say so his little "bag o' tricks" will be very limited by the time he puts on his defense.
He may be "Famous" but I don't know who he is. Fill me in please.
Searching the Titles of these above articles are in DIRECT contrast to the commentary this morning. I listened to the guests on with Lisa Bloom and James Curtis this morning. They BOTH stated that the Prosecution is now bringing it together quite well. It has been a building process and as one of them said "They have pretty much got there"!! The one Prosecutor or former Prosecutor said all these trips to the Bay are very very incriminating. Mark Geragos has NO realistic room to maneuver anymore. So Now Geragos is going to Harp on the "compound" that the cops didn't physically search. For cripes sake, there was absolutely NO evidence that Laci was ever taken in THAT direction. The dogs followed her scent to the end of the pier from which Peterson says he launched his boat. The dogs did this not only once but two or three times. Eloise Anderson stated that Trimble did a "hard end of the line" stance!!
LOL - When Sibley was asked that question about Jackson, I kind of giggled to myself and thought, I wish she would have said "Oh you mean the one that FIRED you"?? But alas, she didn't.
RB: Don't recall the legal eagle who cautioned that what's being reported by pundits, who are not in the courtroom, should be taken with a grain. The DA is very methodical in their approach and we shouldn't prejudge their performance until they rest their case. I cling to his/her words.
I think that's the whole point, to take away all these possible avenues he could stroll down....and lets hope the jury wears their BOOTS as its going to get mighty thick in there. Possibly they will be entertained by the tales he intends to spin.
That's what they get for not calling me.
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.