Posted on 03/04/2003 5:39:16 AM PST by runningbear
The Disappearance of Laci Peterson:
Why Her Husband, Even If Innocent, Should Not Agree To A Lie Detector Test
By JONNA M. SPILBOR
---- Monday, Mar. 03, 2003
In recent weeks, news shows have frequently turned to the notorious case of Laci Peterson - the pregnant Modesto woman who disappeared on Christmas Eve from the home she shared with her husband, Scott. While watching one such bulletin, I turned to my own husband, and said, "Honey, promise me something. If I ever go missing without a trace, and the police are breathing down your neck, do not, I repeat, do not, take a lie detector test. Okay?"
On the advice of counsel, he agreed. Sometimes it helps to be married to a lawyer - even if you are subject to cross-examination for not taking out the garbage.
It's not as clear that Scott Peterson will follow the same advice. Thus far, he's done a lot of talking; indeed, he's even confessed to having carried on an adulterous affair just weeks before his wife's disappearance. A few stretches and pulls by police, and a morsel like this becomes a possible motive. Still, Scott Peterson has yet to hire counsel.
Now Peterson is being pressured to take a polygraph. So far, he's refused. But authorities are continuing to lean on him, arguing that he is not "cooperating." He should keep on refusing - even if he's entirely innocent.
Scott Petersen Is Plainly A Suspect In the Minds of the Police
To begin, Scott Peterson needs to realize he is a suspect. And is it any surprise? After all, isn't the husband always a suspect?
Police and prosecutors have refused to call him a suspect. But they may be withholding the word simply in an attempt to avoid its legal consequences.
Place the word "suspect" before Scott Peterson's name, and arguably, a casual police visit transforms into a formal "detention." A seemingly impromptu chat session becomes an "interrogation." And the Fifth Amendment pops up as an obstacle to the police's investigation. Simply put, a suspect - unlike a husband - has an absolute right to remain silent.
Whether or not the police call Peterson a suspect, they certainly have treated him like one. The police conducted an investigatory search of the Petersons' home - and then they conducted another. This time, authorities pulled out everything that wasn't nailed down.
The first search might have been standard procedure. The second indicated that suspicion has likely fallen on Scott Peterson.
Although investigators have been tight-lipped about what they're hoping to find, they brought along Laci Peterson's sister to assist in the second search. By doing so, police have run the risk of contaminating a potential crime scene; a move which certainly will draw objections from defense counsel when - and if - evidence from the second search of the Peterson home is admitted in the matter.
Only Suspects Are Generally Given Polygraphs in the First Place
Furthermore, the search isn't the only evidence Peterson is a suspect. There's also the request for a polygraph (better known as a lie detector) itself.
The police may be telling Peterson they want to give him the test to "rule him out." If so, that's, quite frankly, a lie on their part.
Police typically reserve polygraphs for weak cases only. The reason is simple: when there exists strong evidence against an accused, a polygraph is wholly unnecessary. Ergo, lie detector tests are not used to rule someone out - but to rule someone very much in.
While evidence that a suspect has failed a lie detector is not admissible against the accused in court, it may provide some basis for probable cause to arrest. The burden of proof necessary for a showing of probable cause to arrest is much lower than the "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard required for a conviction. To make an adequate showing of probable cause, police need only demonstrate a reasonable suspicion that a crime has been committed, and that the accused likely committed it.
Polygraphs Are Often Inaccurate, and Provide Evidence Against the Innocent
Think of a polygraph as a sort of magician's hat, and a suspect as a brightly colored hanky. Any magician, even a bad one, can put a hanky into a hat and pull out a live rabbit. By the same token, police can put a mere suspect into a room with a polygraph machine, and pull out a full-fledged defendant. It's that easy.
With no other leads, the police are doing what they are prone to do: Working backwards. Instead of searching for clues to the killer, the cops are looking for reasons to convict Scott Peterson. In sophisticated legalese, this is what we fancy mouthpieces call a "fishing expedition." And it is precisely why Scott Peterson should keep his mouth shut.
Notice, in my analogy with the hanky, the magician and the rabbit, that I didn't say the suspect had to be guilty in order to become a defendant. That's because he doesn't: The magician's hat works every time.
Rarely do suspects pass polygraph tests. It doesn't mean all suspects are guilty. It means that lie detectors are often wrong.
What About Talking to the Police, But Not Taking a Polygraph?
Okay, you say, I can see why Peterson shouldn't take a polygraph - it might wrongly indicate that he's guilty. But why can't he talk to the police? If he's innocent, he's got nothing to fear, right?
Wrong. When the police tell you anything you say can be used against you, they mean it. Remember, under our system, only guilt - not innocence - needs to be proved. Scott Peterson doesn't have to "prove his innocence" by talking. Instead, the presumption of innocence means that, if he didn't do it, he doesn't need to talk.
If Peterson talks, he may inadvertently get himself into trouble - for instance, by giving slightly different accounts on different occasions due to a failure of memory. He may also attract more and more police attention - and distract from other leads.
Just last week, Modesto police were criticized for ignoring a call from what could turn out to be a critical witness. A neighbor living ten blocks from the Peterson home, called police within a week of Laci Peterson's disappearance to report seeing her the very morning she went missing - a full forty-five minutes after Scott Peterson left to go fishing.
Police have yet to speak to the witness, claiming they haven't had time to return the more than 8,000 phone tips they've received on the case. They have had time, mind you, to keep a close eye on Scott Peterson despite his continued protestations of innocence.
Maybe the most important piece of evidence the police have overlooked is the family dog Laci was walking when she disappeared. Although Laci never returned home from that walk, the dog did. Which means the pooch didn't get too far before his owner went missing. My advice to the Modesto police? Stop looking in the ponds, puddles and potholes, and start knocking on the neighbors' doors.
In the meantime, Scott Peterson should keep his eyes open, and his mouth shut. While communication may keep a marriage together, when one spouse goes missing, silence is golden.
What Do You Think? Message Boards
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jonna M. Spilbor is a frequent guest commentator on Court-TV and other television news networks, where she has covered many of the nation's high-profile criminal trials. In the courtroom, she has handled hundreds of cases as a criminal defense attorney, and also served in the San Diego City Attorney's Office, Criminal Division, and the Office of the United States Attorney in the Drug Task Force and Appellate units. In 1998, she earned certification as a Court Appointed Special Advocate with the San Diego Juvenile Court. She is a graduate of Thomas Jefferson School of Law, where she was a member of the Law Review.
Hope, and a Frenzy, Fade for a Missing-Person Case
MODESTO JOURNAL
Hope, and a Frenzy, Fade for a Missing-Person Case
By DEAN E. MURPHY
ODESTO, Calif., Feb. 28 — Penny Fleischman is back battling the dandelions in her front lawn, trying to catch them before they go to seed. The other day, she also let one of her cats outside for the first time in six weeks. "It was too dangerous before, with all the traffic," Mrs. Fleischman said. "Even with my double-pane windows, I could hear the generators on the big trucks."
Mrs. Fleischman does not live on a busy highway, but it seemed that way until the last few days. Her home is on Covena Avenue, across the street and a few doors down from the green ranch-style house of Scott and Laci Peterson. Like many of her neighbors, Mrs. Fleischman knew the Petersons as the nice young couple expecting a son.
Mrs. Peterson, 27, was reported missing by her husband on Dec. 24, and almost immediately, Covena Avenue became clogged with volunteer searchers, well-wishers, curiosity seekers and reporters. At one point, the crowds grew so large that the police closed the block to traffic.
Now, more than two months after the disappearance, the block is mostly silent. Mrs. Peterson is still missing; the date her baby was due is two weeks past; and life on Covena Avenue and in much of Modesto is moving on.
"When people disappear in Modesto, we look for them," Mayor Carmen Sabatino said. "But there is only so much emotion and attention that a population can give to any issue that isn't close to resolution. It is like a clock running down. How many times can you run into a brick wall?"
The weekend searches for Mrs. Peterson by hundreds of volunteers have stopped. Her photographs, once plastered on virtually every street corner and storefront in town, are still plentiful but not ubiquitous. At the Peterson home, a bare mattress has been propped against a front window, and the outside porch and garage lights have been left burning. The gate is padlocked.
Mrs. Fleischman, who has lived on Covena Avenue for 50 years, said she rarely saw Mr. Peterson, who had a falling-out with his wife's family last month after he admitted to an extramarital affair and sold Mrs. Peterson's car. The police have not named Mr. Peterson a suspect in his wife's disappearance. But many people here view him with deep suspicion.
"I used to work in the courts," Mrs. Fleischman said, adding that she thought the day would come "when they are reading his arrest warrant to him."
After appearing early this week on CNN's "Larry King Live," several of Mrs. Peterson's relatives went into seclusion. They needed to return to work, and catch up on shopping and other chores, a family spokeswoman said.
Mostly, the spokeswoman, Kim Petersen, said, they needed a reprieve from the public ordeal of the last two months.
"They are completely physically and emotionally exhausted from living with this," Ms. Petersen said. "You can only do so much. What can be said that hasn't already been said?"
It is not that Mrs. Peterson's family or the people of Modesto have given up on finding Mrs. Peterson. The police department has spent $250,000 on overtime pay to investigate the case, an unprecedented amount. The bills keep mounting, and no one has complained, city officials said.
But a certain resignation comes with this city's unhappy experience in recent years with high-profile missing-person cases. That education is perhaps enabling the city to care about Mrs. Peterson but to stop obsessing about her. "As a community, this is our third event like this," Mayor Sabatino said. "We are dealing with it."
Modesto was the hometown of Chandra Ann Levy, the government intern who disappeared in Washington in 2001 and was found dead in a park there a year later. Ms. Levy's parents live here and have offered comfort to the Peterson family, and former Representative Gary A. Condit, who was linked to Ms. Levy, lives nearby in Ceres.
This is also the city where the federal investigation was based in 1999 when a woman and two girls were reported missing in nearby Yosemite National Park. The missing, Carole Sund, her daughter, Juli; and their friend Silvina Pelosso, were eventually found, murdered. A handyman, Cary Stayner, was convicted last year and sentenced to death for the killings.
(Excerpt) Read more at writ.news.findlaw.com ...
Scott Free: Scott Peterson didn't kill his wife, but he is full of bologna
Scott Free
Scott Peterson, managing editor March 03, 2003
Scott Peterson didn't kill his wife, but he is full of bologna
My wife walked into the room just in time to see the confession.
A breathless reporter was on camera, talking about the startling news. Under the picture of the reporter, the bulletin was printed in large letters on Fox News: A woman admitted that she had been having an affair with suspected murderer Scott Peterson.
As Ricky Ricardo used to say, I had some splainin' to do.
Fortunately, I had an alibi this time, so Nancy was not too worried. The woman I was accused of murdering was my wife. We only had to check Nancy's pulse and I was in the clear. (Because she fainted slightly due to the news, that took a little more work than we thought. But eventually my name was cleared.)
Having a common name has its blessings. It means people generally can read your lousy penmanship and you don't have to explain your spelling too much (Is that "on" or "en"?).
But it does mean you get a lot of strange calls from people thinking you are somebody you are not.
"Are you the same Scott Peterson who was a pilot?"
"Are you the Scott Peterson who had that bologna for sale in Chicago?"
"Did you used to work at the Journal in circulation?"
"Aren't you the guy who murdered his wife in California?"
No, no, no and (thought I'd fall for that last question, didn't you?) no.
I used to camp a lot as a Boy Scout and I can still remember the day my mother handed me a newspaper clipping about a boy named Scott Peterson who fell to his death while climbing at Devil's Lake State Park. It was eerie, because I had recently been there and this boy was almost exactly my age.
However, if you think you are unique, I urge you to do a Google search of your name, and you quickly find out how ordinary you really are. There is somebody out there named Scott Peterson who sells cars. I have my own logo stuck on the bumpers of cars in South Dakota.
According to Google, I am also an English professor in Maine, I designed a phlebotomy cart, I am a freestyle swimmer at the University of Massachusetts, I wrote a vegetarian cookbook, I am a reporter in Iraq for the Christian Science Monitor, and I probably murdered my wife, Laci. (Now, I ask you, would I have had time to murder my wife while I was doing all this? You can ask my wife, Nancy. She can tell you I don't have any time to walk the dog, much less do the other things mentioned in the 688,000 things Google found with my name on them.)
I am not alone. My son, Kyle Peterson, when he still had hopes of being a big-leaguer, looked at me wide-eyed one day when I told him the Milwaukee Brewers had just picked up a pitcher named Kyle Peterson.
With a curious blend of hope and fear in his face, the little tyke said, half questioning, "That's not me?"
EXCERPTED LINK....
As for giving credit to Scott for having admitted the affair -- he did if after he was caught. Initially he lied about it. There might even be other girlfriends.
Wrong. When the police tell you anything you say can be used against you, they mean it. Remember, under our system, only guilt - not innocence - needs to be proved. Scott Peterson doesn't have to "prove his innocence" by talking. Instead, the presumption of innocence means that, if he didn't do it, he doesn't need to talk.
Says it all...
Don't know if anyone viewed MSNBC story, EXCERPTED:
Police continue to insist that their goal is to gather evidence and consider all possibilities. In fact, on the record, Scott is not a suspect.
What does Scott think?
Scott told Abrams, “I hope the police are doing everything they can to find Laci, and I trust that they are. I am missing my wife and my child. I can’t drive, I can’t sleep. Sometimes I feel I just can’t do it. I feel like I’m in a dark corner, and I just can’t function.” Abrams believes Scott sounds like a broken man – and no wonder considering all the pressure that Scott has been under from police, media and Laci’s family.
This week alone the hoopla was enormous. The entire street where Scott and Laci live was shut down and police tape was put around the house. According to one investigator, the police tape was an indication they are considering the house a crime scene – though this was not an official statement.
On Wednesday’s Abrams Report, forensic pathologist, Michael Baden, and former FBI profiler, Clint Van Zandt, joined Abrams. They commented on whether or not the search can be considered a criminal investigation.
According to Zandt, “It’s semantics here. Are they targeting Scott Peterson? This is a guy who continues to shoot himself in the foot and wonder why he’s bleeding. He’s got a relationship outside of marriage, now we’re tying Viagra into that. Who knows what that means, and who cares at this point? But we’ve got a guy who sells his wife’s vehicle, who supposedly is going to sell the house, takes out a life insurance policy, runs down to Mexico for work or whatever. He’s grown a mustache and he’s grown a beard. I’ve worked with the families of kidnapped victims for years and the one thing they do is always do is keep everything constant because when their loved one comes home they believe they want everything to be the same. This guy has changed everything. It’s like he’s closed the book and he’s moving on with his life. He says one thing, he does another ... and that’s what bothers me about him.”
According to Baden, “Certainly, one can’t eliminate Scott by going to his house. The only reason they’d be going to his house is not to eliminate him. There’s nothing they can find there that will exclude him, and I think that what they’re doing is trying to get as much information as they can. There may be some evidence that they have that she was injured in the house. They’ll be looking at all the traps, all the water, the bathtub.”
This second search may be driven by findings from the first search – though at this point what the police are doing is all speculation.
In the meantime, the families are struggling to come to terms with events.
Jackie Peterson, Scott’s mother, continues to stand behind Scott and told Abrams, “Scott is a victim in this. We’re talking about Laci’s family. It’s Scott Peterson, her husband, who is missing his wife and baby. And I think people need to start remembering that.”
However, Laci Peterson’s family, the Rochas, spoke with MSNBC’s “Donahue” on Feb. 11, and talked to “The Abrams Report” February 13th with a different take.
The first public signs of strain were evident when Sharon Rocha, Laci’s mother, told “Donahue” that she had questions about Scott the minute she heard that Laci had disappeared. Laci’s siblings, Brent Rocha and Amy Rocha, expressed the same apprehension of Scott.
Brent Rocha: “I don’t think he (Scott) is cooperating as fully as he could be. He’s not acting like a husband who’s missing his wife. He’s not working with the family — our family at least, in finding Laci. He has not been truthful or forthcoming; just numerous behaviors that just don’t add up for us.”
Scott’s actions and inactions have caused a rift between the families that appears to have started over the news that Scott had an affair prior to Laci’s disappearance. Scott eventually admitted to the affair and said that it had nothing to do with Laci’s Christmas Eve disappearance. The Rochas, however, are still struggling with the revelation.
The shocks continue. Only time will tell what the police have been able to find this week.
That's why I tell my kids to build their reputations for truth-telling, because one day it might really matter that people believe them. It is easy to see why people suspect a liar of telling other lies...like "what really happened" to his wife. And it is hard to sympathize with a man who cheats on his pregnant wife.
It appears his first concern was not getting caught.
My husband has a common name with an uncommon spelling. Unless someone knows us very well they probably don't know how we spell our last name. Just a few weeks ago a man was arrested in this area for several burgleries. Even though the name was spelled a little differently, it was still quite shocking to see the name flashed on the TV and in the newspaper. Thankfully the guy doesn't look anything like my husband and they usually showed the suspects picture with the name. Otherwise it could have made for a lot of explaining especially since my husband and I have master keys to hundreds of apartments.
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.