Remains to be released to family; dogs, hypnosis may be part of hearing

Testimony about human scent-tracking dogs and a prosecution witness interviewed using "hypnosis techniques" is expected to play a role in the preliminary hearing for accused double murderer Scott Peterson, newly released court documents show.

A separate court document made public Monday indicates that the remains of Peterson's wife, Laci, and unborn son, Conner, will be released to family members no later than Friday after a defense specialist X-rays the fetus.

Scott Peterson, 30, is charged with two counts of murder in the deaths. He has pleaded innocent.

The bodies were found in April along the eastern shore of San Francisco Bay, roughly four months after Laci Peterson's reported disappearance from her Modesto home touched off a widespread search.

Modesto police used several dogs in the hunt for the 27-year-old substitute teacher.

Scott Peterson said he last saw his wife the morning of Dec. 24 as he left for a solo fishing trip to the bay and she prepared to walk their golden retriever, McKenzie, in Dry Creek Regional Park.

A potentially key development came Dec. 26, when a specially trained bloodhound from the Contra Costa County Sheriff's Department indicated to its handler that Laci Peterson left her Covena Avenue home in a vehicle, not on foot.

The dog headed to Yosemite Boulevard, away from the park. Later, the dog led its handler from the Peterson house all the way to Maze Boulevard.

The defense has requested a bevy of information about dogs used in the case, including their veterinary records, training reports, reliability tests and trainers' backgrounds, according to court documents filed by defense attorney Kirk McAllister.

In a July 29 letter to Senior Deputy District Attorney Rick Distaso, one of the prosecutors on the case, lead defense attorney Mark Geragos wrote that Distaso had "previously indicated to me that the prosecution intends to call witnesses at the preliminary hearing who will testify as to human scent-tracking dogs."

The defense specifically wants information about a dog named Merlin and the dog's handler, Cindee Valentin, a deputy with the Contra Costa County Emergency Services Search and Rescue Unit, a division of the sheriff's department. Reserve Capt. Christopher Boyer of the search and rescue unit also was named.

Valentin could not be reached for comment. Contra Costa County Sheriff's spokesman Jimmy Lee said Valentin had been subpoenaed and was covered by a gag order imposed in the case by Judge Al Girolami.

The dog information request was contained in an eight-page motion listing 26 areas where the defense wanted more information from prosecutors.

Prosecutors replied in documents filed Monday that they had fully complied with the law, turning over 23,700 pages of documents, 18 videotapes, 100 audiotapes, five DVDs and three CDs of wiretap recordings, among other items.

Distaso also noted in the filing that prosecutors are requesting information from the defense, including the names and addresses of potential witnesses and any real evidence the defense intends to offer at the preliminary hearing, set for Sept. 9.

The prosecution document also indicates that one prosecution witness, identified as "Kristen Deppenwolf" was questioned in a "cognitive interview where hypnosis techniques were used."

A Kristen Deppenwolf could not be identified through public records, and it was unclear what role she could play in the case.

Distaso's response also noted that the prosecution has no known evidence that would clear Peterson.

Geragos alleged in court documents filed last month that prosecution evidence turned over to the defense last month "totally exonerates" Peterson and will tip off the true killers if made public.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Peterson case has attracted national media attention during the search and now the court hearings

Professing a reluctance to turn the proceeding into a "reality" television show, Stanislaus County Superior Court Judge Al Girolami on Monday banned television and still cameras from the preliminary hearing for accused double-murderer Scott Peterson.

Prosecutors are preparing to lay out closely guarded elements of their case during the hearing, sheduled for Sept. 9.

Girolami is expected to decide at the close of the hearing whether there is sufficient evidence to try the 30-year-old fertilizer salesman from Modesto.

Peterson is charged with murdering his wife, Laci, 27, and the couple's unborn son, Conner.

The case sparked intense media attention after Laci Peterson, nearly eight months pregnant, was reported missing Christmas Eve. Her body and that of her son were found in April about a mile apart along the eastern shore of San Francisco Bay, within miles of the spot where Scott Peterson said he launched his boat Dec. 24 for a solo fishing trip.

Peterson has pleaded innocent to two counts of murder in the deaths. He could receive the death penalty if convicted.

"As this is a death-penalty case, the court must carefully and cautiously consider the impact cameras in the courtroom may have on providing a fair trial," Girolami wrote in his six-page ruling.

Girolami suggested print media coverage had less potential to taint the jury pool.

Prospective jurors will have a more difficult time avoiding or disregarding something they have seen replayed "many times on television in living color as opposed to something they have read about a few times in black and white," Girolami wrote.

The decision came four days after the judge ruled the hearing would be open to the public.

Television networks, including CNN, Court TV and NBC, had filed almost 1,000 pages of documents in their bid to allow cameras in the courtroom.

A group of newspapers, including The Bee, had sought to have a still camera photographer cover the proceeding. Prosecutors had requested the camera ban, and members of Laci Peterson's family joined that request.

The victims' families will be "forced to relive their worst nightmare in a very public way, which unfortunately is necessary for the process," Girolami wrote.

"Televising these passionate proceedings is not, however, necessary to the process."

Scott Peterson's defense attorneys had argued to hold the hearing behind closed doors. When Girolami denied that request last week, they asked that cameras be allowed.

Henry Schleiff, chairman and CEO of Court TV, expressed disappointment with Monday's ruling but said the network's policy is not to appeal such decisions.

"According to our Constitution, trials are meant to be public, and we believe that all citizens -- not just the print press or those few who can fit into a courtroom -- should be able to watch their judicial system in action," Schleiff said in a written statement. "We respect Judge Girolami's decision and will not contest it."

Alonzo Wickers, whose firm represents broadcast media on the issue, said he could not comment on whether other networks would appeal.

"We hope the judge will revisit the issue before a subsequent proceeding in the case," Wickers said.

In the detailed ruling, Girolami cited 18 factors he weighed in his decision, including witnesses' privacy rights, the impact on finding an unbiased jury and the effect on ongoing law enforcement activity in the case.

"Because this case remains in its earliest stages, the possibility exists that the actual perpetrator remains at large," Girolami wrote.

The judge also said television coverage would "significantly increase the odds of requiring a change of venue."

Moving the trial is "not a desirable option" and would result in considerable hardship to the witnesses and added expense to the public, Girolami wrote.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

August 20, 2003 -- The prosecution in the Laci Peterson murder case hypnotized a dog walker who resembles her in hopes of poking holes in husband Scott Peterson's defense, sources told The Post yesterday.

Cops believe Scott murdered Laci last Christmas Eve, before driving her body to Berkeley, Calif., and dumping it into San Francisco Bay. The defense has claimed witnesses spotted the pregnant woman walking her dog in Modesto at the time Scott Peterson allegedly murdered her.

To cut off the defense, prosecutors hope to show those witnesses were mistaking dog-walking Modesto resident Kristen Dempewolf, 34, for Laci, sources told The Post.

Both women were at about the same stage of pregnancy on Christmas Eve. Dempewolf delivered her baby at a Modesto hospital in early January - around the same time Laci Peterson would have given birth to son Conner.

Dempewolf's name surfaced on Monday, when unsealed court documents listed her - misspelled as "Deppenwolf" - as a witness interviewed under hypnosis. Investigators hypnotized Dempewolf so she could specifically recall .......

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Scott Peterson, 30, is charged with two counts of murder in the deaths. He has pleaded innocent.

The bodies were found in April along Bay shore near Richmond, roughly four months after Laci Peterson's reported disappearance from her Modesto home touched off a widespread search.

Modesto police used several dogs in the hunt for the 27-year-old substitute teacher.

Scott Peterson said he last saw his wife the morning of Dec. 24 as he left for a solo fishing trip to the Bay, and she prepared to walk their golden retriever, McKenzie, in Dry Creek Regional Park.

A potentially key development came Dec. 26, when a specially trained bloodhound from the Contra Costa County Sheriff's Office indicated to its handler that Laci Peterson left her Covena Avenue home in a vehicle, not on foot.

The dog headed to Yosemite Boulevard, away from the park. Later, the dog led its handler from the Peterson house all the way to Maze Boulevard.

Lead defense attorney Mark Geragos wrote in a July 29 letter to Rich Distaso, senior deputy district attorney and one of the lead prosecutors on the case, that Distaso had "previously indicated to me that the prosecution intends to call witnesses at the preliminary hearing who will testify as to human scent-tracking dogs."

Valentin could not be reached for comment. Contra Costa County Sheriff's spokesman Jimmy Lee said Valentin had been subpoenaed and was covered by a gag order imposed in the case by Judge Al Girolami.

The dog information request was contained in an eight-page motion listing 26 areas where the defense wanted more information from prosecutors.

At the defense's request, a hearing on evidentiary issues is scheduled for Sept. 2.

The prosecution document also indicates that one prosecution witness, identified as "Kristen Deppenwolf" was questioned in a "cognitive interview where hypnosis techniques were used."

According to Cherry and my recollection, (now that she jolted it), this is not new news.

On your second point, I thought I sort of addressed that in my hypothetical. If one knows something, it doesn't necessarily mean that one actually participated, does it?

Liable as an accomplice doesn't mean full punishment for a capital murder, does it, unless you're being held liable as a principal, and it's probably very unlikely they'd give the "principal" the death penalty, isn't it?

At this juncture, we can only hope that prosecution has a hell of a lot more than they've publicly revealed, and that somewhere in their bank of evidence, there's something of a smoking gun. I just hope they aren't playing too many games with the defense.

My bedtime. I need to be up by 11. LOL

Thanks for the heads up! My, oh my. If that yes is clearly audible and Geragos doesn't make the jury think it was a sneeze or a throat clearing, that is awesome evidence for the prosecution. Wonder what ELSE they have?

Can he be taught to say less, rather than to over-explain, so that he will put his foot in his mouth less? Is he or she arrogant-appearing?

Scott will ham it up like all else he does, and he can't do anything without that arrogant smirk.

And how does the person dress? Are they insistent on dressing in a "rich" way?

You know Scotty will have a well-cut suit and a new haircut.

What if his whole deal at the time of that call was to get Amber alone and send her to the sturgeons?

What if his goal was to be free, not to be tied down to another needy chick with a kid? Maybe he wanted to intimate that he had some very important news about what happened to Laci to get her to agree to see him so he could eliminate her as the perfect witness she has turned out to be?

LOL...still gets kind of crazy, and where does my time go to... ;o) Last of the summer holiday weekend coming up. Labor Day, and I bet lots are off for a final weekend camping get away...Including myself.. Up to the Yuba River for a day... should be fun, for a final run of it.. ;o)

The word "yes" coming out of Scott's mouth is new news to me--and to lots of others, too, I think.

If you're a principal, people are just as likely to give you the chair, if they think the whole thing warrants it. A principal is "one of the ones who did it."

As for an accomplice, I don't believe Scott was an accomplice. Either he did this, as one of the actual murderers (which includes--if he hired someone to do it), or he's uninvolved. JMO.

And this is big news. If this story is accurate, and if it is admitted, I think the incident it describes will go a long way towards convicting him.

Any way you look at it, if I were Amber, I'd be afraid. Not just afraid of Scott himself, but afraid about Lee and Jackie, and about people like Matt Dalton, etc. Not to say that all of the above would have something done to this witness, but... stranger things have happened.

So that was it! Glad you're back again, lol!

The title of this thread/article is driving me crazy. Every time I skim past it, I think it said "Remains to be released to family dog". Horrible, I know.

If they haven't got much to show, I guess the best defense strategy is for everyone to sit back and keep their big fat flapping lips shut! (Picture Geragos doing THAT... nahhhhh... )

LOL. Nahhhhh. ;-)

I'm beginning to suspect you like the attention.

Not me!! My darling daughter is the drama queen....I like things nice and quiet!

I read the title the same way at first! ;0)
Just got the puter at work fixed this AM and a few minutes ago District Office sent me over a brand new Dell!
Not going to shut this Mac down till I make sure the other is up and running a-ok.

Nice to see you Jackie!

There isn't anything much more maddening than a sick/dead computer! I could handle not having use of some of my appliances but I never could handle being without my computer! :)

The words "yes, but" are new, and it changes the original reporting significantly. I'm still wondering where that leak came from. While Fox is generally pretty accurate with their reporting, they do sometimes make errors. I won't speculate about those mistakes, but I have a hunch they'll back away from the direct quote.

As for Vel's speculation about the "cult", there is another remote possibility here. WHAT IF Scott was involved in some kind of drug ring operation; that he was indebted heavily to his "bosses", and they wanted their share, or something along those lines. If there really was some other explanation along those lines, prosecution nor defense will never go there. JMO

I'm sorry Sandy! :0( I knew my SCOWS would be worried about me. But please know that I am a very tough, stubborn Italian girl and I might get down at times, but I always come back strong! Plus I get alot of great support from you all...how could I go wrong??
It was just puter problems this time tho. Nettie says that I like all the attention...drama. (NOT!!!)
Honestly, I like peace and quiet! ;0)

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.