Peterson attorney wants $15,000 back

Stanislaus County Superior Court Judge Al Girolami plans to hear arguments on releasing two pieces of evidence Dec. 3, when Scott Peterson is to be arraigned on the double-murder charges upheld Tuesday at his preliminary hearing.

Defense attorney Mark Geragos asked prosecutors to release the $15,000 cash Peterson had with him when he was arrested and Peterson's Ford pickup, which police seized in December.

"It's an expensive task for the family to fund this," he said. "It isn't going to get any less expensive."

Prosecutor Rick Distaso opposed the move, saying both items are evidence he intends to introduce at trial.

Chief Deputy District Attorney John Goold, who serves as a spokesman for the district attorney's office, said physical evidence can have more impact on jurors than photos of the items.

Geragos also indicated that he would file motions to move the trial and to ask another judge to overturn Girolami's Tuesday order because of insufficient evidence.

Girolami indicated that he also plans to revisit a gag order he imposed in June that bars people connected to the case from speaking publicly about it.

Geragos, citing the gag order, refused to say outside court why he wants the trial to be held elsewhere.

Asked about Girolami's idea to bus jurors from San Joaquin County to Modesto, which was done in a previous murder trial, Geragos said people in neighboring.......

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

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

November 20, 2003 -- Workaholic defense attorney Mark Geragos was still in Modesto handling the Scott Peterson preliminary hearing Tuesday when he agreed to defend Michael Jackson against sexual-molestation charges. Geragos insists he can easily juggle California's two highest-profile criminal cases.

"They're just two cases," Geragos told The Post as he worked a conference call with Jackson's people on another line. "There's no problem, no issue."

But longtime Geragos rival Gloria Allred, also an advocate for prosecuting Jackson, said she's worried that this move may cause delays in the Peterson trial.

"Sometimes, as in the O.J. Simpson case, attorneys demand a speedy trial and that can be very effective," Allred said.

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

Los Angeles attorney Mark Geragos (l.) appears with another big-name client, accused murderer Scott Peterson.

Move over, Johnnie Cochran. Mark Geragos - tapped by Michael Jackson to defend him against child molestation charges - is now the lawyer of choice for high-profile suspects.

Some say Geragos already has his hands full defending philandering fertilizer salesman Scott Peterson, who is accused of killing his pregnant wife, Laci, and unborn son in Modesto, Calif. But with 20 years of experience and a slew of celebrity clients, the double challenge may mark the pinnacle of the slick Los Angeles lawyer's career.

The son of an Armenian-American lawyer, Geragos began to show his star power in 1998 and 1999 when he won two acquittals for Whitewater scandal figure Susan McDougal. He kept up his Clinton connection, later representing Bill Clinton's half-brother on drunken driving charges that were dropped after Roger Clinton agreed to plead guilty to a lesser charge.

The same year, Geragos got felony charges of kidnapping and making terrorist threats thrown out against rapper Nathaniel (Nate Dogg) Hale.

He has since defended sticky-fingered actress Winona Ryder in her shoplifting trial and represented former Rep. Gary Condit.

Geragos raised eyebrows this April when he agreed to represent Scott Peterson, just days after making an appearance on "Larry King Live" as a commentator about his soon-to-be client: "It's a damning, circumstantial case. The man is a sociopath if he did this crime."

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

Legal experts say that taped phone conversations between Scott Peterson and his girlfriend Amber Frey could have big implications in Peterson's murder case.

Scott Peterson is accused of killing his wife Laci and her unborn son. During the police investigation, Frey let police record her phone conversations with Peterson for almost two months.

One of these 214 calls, a rambling 23-minute conversation, was entered in evidence Tuesday. It includes evasions, denials, and pleas for patience from Peterson as Frey tries to get him to explain himself and events. Criminal lawyer Michele Hagan says it is damaging to his case.

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

MODESTO - The case against accused double-murderer Scott Peterson could come down to roughly 10 minutes.

That's the space of time from when someone used Peterson's cell phone in or near his home the morning of Dec. 24 until a neighbor said she found the Petersons' dog standing in the road, its leash dangling from its collar.

If the 10:08 a.m. call indicates the time Peterson left his home, his alibi appears to hang on his pregnant wife mopping the floor, leaving to take the dog for a walk and being abducted during that 10-minute stretch.

Neighbor Karen Servas testified that she found the Petersons' golden retriever standing in the street at 10:18 a.m. She deduced that time after checking a time-stamped receipt and clocking how long it took her to retrace her route to the store.

Peterson told police he left home at about 9:30 a.m. Dec. 24 to go fishing in San Francisco Bay, stopping at a warehouse he used in his work as a fertilizer salesman to get his boat and to check his e-mail, Detective Al Brocchini testified during Peterson's preliminary hearing.

Peterson said when he left, his wife was preparing to mop and planning to run errands before walking their golden retriever, McKenzie, Brocchini said.

Prosecutors contend Peterson murdered his wife and unborn son either late Dec. 23 or early Dec. 24. He could receive the death penalty if convicted on both murder counts.

The bodies were found in April along the bay's eastern shore, less than two miles from the spot where Peterson said he went fishing.

The 10:08 a.m. call from Peterson's cell phone to his voicemail appeared to show the caller driving westward from the Petersons' Covena Avenue home because it switched to a different cell phone tower, district attorney investigator Steve Jacobson testified.

"Does it appear that he's driving from the house and that, while making the phone call, that the cell phone site switches?" defense attorney Mark Geragos asked.

Cell phone tower data cannot pinpoint a location, Jacobson acknowledged; it can only indicate that the call came from within the area it covered.

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

Phone calls to Peterson intrigue psychologists
By GARTH STAPLEY and JOHN COTÉ
BEE STAFF WRITERS
Last Updated: November 22, 2003, 07:49:21 AM PST

As news reports of the missing Laci Peterson kicked into high gear Dec. 26,
Amber Frey abruptly broke her pattern of calling her boyfriend an average of
once a day.
While it's unclear when Frey learned that the man she had been dating, Scott
Peterson, was married and his pregnant wife missing since Christmas Eve, she
called him 14 times the day after Christmas.

The Fresno massage therapist may have been in shock and in denial, leading to
her first call to Modesto police four days later, two nationally recognized
psychology experts said.

A judge on Tuesday ordered Peterson, 31, to stand trial on charges that he
murdered his 27-year-old wife, Laci, and their unborn son, Conner. Prosecutors
are seeking the death penalty.

A review of cell phone records revealed Tuesday near the conclusion of Scott
Peterson's preliminary hearing brings into clearer focus his relationship with
the secret lover he initially denied having.

For example:

Frey made the first advance, calling Peterson three times on Nov. 19 after
getting his number from a friend. He called her four times over the next three
days.

She has said she met the Modesto fertilizer salesman Nov. 20, and they began
dating. At that point Peterson told her "that not only had he not ever been
married, he'd never been in a serious relationship before," Detective Jon
Buehler testified at the hearing.

The couple exchanged no calls Dec. 24. Authorities have said they believe
Peterson killed his wife that morning or the night before.

Peterson called Frey four times on Dec. 31. That evening, more than 1,000
people held aloft glowing candles in a tearful vigil for the missing
mother-to-be whose dimpled smile appeared on posters all over town.

Peterson rang his girlfriend six times on Jan. 6 -- the highest number of calls
he made to her on any single day of their relationship. That was the day he
told Frey that his wife was Laci Peterson.

Frey, cooperating with police, pretended to be stunned. Buehler said he was at
her side during the 23-minute phone conversation.

Peterson told Frey he was "longing to hold onto you."

The next day, the former lovers spent 100 minutes together on a single call.

Although investigator Steve Jacobson said no calls were exchanged on
Valentine's Day, phone records obtained by The Bee show that Frey called
Peterson once that day.

Jacobson testified that he obtained only cell phone records. Also, Frey used
another phone Feb. 13-15, according to Jacobson's report, and a source said
Frey's cell phone was out of service those days.

In all, Peterson called Frey 125 times, and she dialed him 119 times. That is a
total of 244 calls over 93 days starting five weeks before Laci Peterson
disappeared and ending when Frey told Peterson to quit phoning her in a final
three-minute call Feb. 19.

About not being married

That Peterson had a girlfriend could provide authorities with an explanation
for why he might kill his wife. During the lengthy preliminary hearing,
prosecutors painted a picture of a man impassioned with another woman.

Peterson initially lied to his girlfriend about being married.

The business associate who had set up Peterson with Frey discovered his
deception Dec. 6 and confronted him, Detective Al Brocchini testified. Peterson
told her "that he sometimes tells people he's married, and he tells some people
he's not married, because he's lost his wife," Brocchini said.

Peterson told Frey on Dec. 9 that he had "lost his wife," Buehler testified.

"She could see tears coming out of his eyes going down his cheek," Buehler
said. "She could hear his stomach making noises. She was sitting very close to
him at the time. They were holding hands."

The point at which Frey learned the truth hasn't been made public. But some
psychology experts say an abnormal peak in her calls to Peterson -- Dec. 26,
coinciding with intensifying reports on the missing Laci Peterson -- could
speak volumes.

"At the point that facts started flying around, I think (Frey) got scared,
panicked and probably became very frightened that she could become implicated,"
said Dr. Robi Ludwig, a New York City psychotherapist and frequent TV
newsmagazine commentator.

"I don't know if that got expressed by her making many phone calls, hoping she
was wrong, wishing she was wrong, praying she was wrong," Ludwig continued.
"Here was this guy she really wanted to believe in."

Frey passed a police lie detector test regarding involvement in Laci Peterson's
demise, a source said.

If Frey became aware of the situation Dec. 26, it took her four days to
approach police.

Ludwig explained the delay: "Denial. She's hoping that this man she's very
passionate about is who she thinks he is. Once she goes to police, she has to
grieve that relationship because calling police ends that relationship."

Perhaps Frey hoped to convince Peterson to "come forward on his own,"
speculated Dr. Evan Nelson, a Virginia forensic psychologist who recently
testified at the trial of Washington, D.C., sniper defendant Lee Boyd Malvo.

Or maybe Frey was afraid Peterson would point the finger at her and bolt. Or
that she would be hounded by the media, Nelson said.

"All those are possibilities," said Nelson, who has testified in 300 murder
cases. "But it's all guesswork. Frequently what the public sees (initially) and
what comes out in trial isn't the same."

Ruth Jones, a criminal law professor at McGeorge School of Law in Sacramento,
said a normal reaction in Frey's case would be to "want to talk to the person
first" before deciding a course of action.

"Think of all the people who knew Scott Peterson," continued Jones, a former
New York City prosecutor. "Not one immediately said, 'Oh, my God -- maybe it
was Scott.' That's one of the things that make this case so dramatic. You can't
look in (someone's) eyes and say he's a killer."

In televised interviews in late January, Peterson said he told his wife about
the affair in early December. Laci Peterson's family and friends have expressed
doubt about that statement.

Peterson also said he immediately told police about Frey when officers
responded to a missing person call Dec. 24. But a detective testified that
Peterson denied the affair at that point, and it appears that authorities
didn't know about Frey until she came forward Dec. 30.

Calls to Laci's friends

Frey has not granted media interview requests since, speaking publicly only
twice: at a January news conference arranged by police and in May to announce
she had hired a lawyer.

But Frey did reach out to people close to Laci Peterson, calling the
then-missing woman's friends and family members 53 times over seven weeks
starting the day after she went public about her relationship with Scott
Peterson. She hoped to assure them she had no idea he was married, sources
said.

Frey also called detectives more than 200 times through mid-March.

Although Frey's calls to Scott Peterson were fairly regular both before and
after Laci Peterson was reported missing, she dialed him more than fives times
a day only twice: on Dec. 26 and Feb. 1, when she called 14 times and nine
times, respectively.

The first occurred before she was in cahoots with authorities. But on Feb. 1,
Frey called Buehler, her police handler, 19 times.

That same morning, Frey placed two calls to a polygraph service. Sources said
Peterson offered to submit to a lie detector test, but the plan never
materialized.

Peterson called Frey four times that day.

Other notable days during that period:

Dec. 31, Peterson called Frey four times the day a massive vigil was held for
his missing wife. When he called is unknown. Frey received 13 incoming calls
that day, including two within 15 minutes of the vigil's start, one in the
middle of it, one at its end and two others later than night.

Jan. 24, the day Frey revealed the affair publicly. She didn't call Peterson
that day, but he called her once; the next day, they exchanged five calls.

Jan. 27, the day Peterson taped his interview for ABC's "Good Morning America."
The two spoke three times on the phone.

After the show aired the first segment of a two-part interview with Diane
Sawyer the next day, Frey called Peterson's cell phone for a call that lasted
23 minutes. She called a second time later, and he called her twice as well.

Feb. 10, Frey's 28th birthday as well as Laci Peterson's due date. Also on this
day, nude photos of Frey began appearing on some National Enquirer newsstands.

Frey dialed Peterson's numbers four times that day, and he called her once.

Bee staff writer Garth Stapley can be reached at 578-2390 or
gstapley@modbee.com .

Bee staff writer John Coté can be reached at 578-2394 or jcote@modbee.com .

Peterson versions collide with law

By JOHN COTÉ

and GARTH STAPLEY

Last Updated: November 23, 2003, 09:07:05 AM PST

Scott Peterson's preliminary hearing on double-murder charges ended with almost as many questions as when it began.

Prosecutors didn't answer how, where or why they believe Laci Peterson was killed.

They didn't show how or when her body found its way to the chilly waters of San Francisco Bay.

The witness who could provide a motive -- Peterson's girlfriend at the time his wife disappeared -- didn't take the stand.

With a low threshold of proof at preliminary hearings, there was little chance Peterson would not be bound over for trial on charges he murdered his wife, Laci, and their unborn son.

"I like to jokingly say it's, 'Is my client breathing?'" defense attorney Mark Geragos said of the standard prosecutors had to meet.

They demonstrated more than that, pummeling Peterson's credibility, raising questions about his alibi and introducing a range of circumstantial evidence that could tie him to the crimes.

But proving the case at trial -- with the death penalty as the announced goal -- is another matter, legal observers said.

Although the bodies were found less than two miles from where Peterson said he went fishing Dec. 24, physical evidence against him seemingly was in short supply.

A single hair found attached to pliers in the bottom of Peterson's fishing boat might have been his wife's. Cement powder spilled on a flat-bed trailer had five bare patches that could indicate Peterson made concrete anchors. A detective found a loaded .22-caliber handgun in Peterson's truck but didn't know the results of a residue test to show whether Peterson fired it.

"This case is a collision of common sense and the law," said Bernie Grimm, a prominent Washington, D.C., defense attorney.

"Common sense will tell you he did it, by the way he acted and the fact that Geragos can't supply who really did it," Grimm said. "But when you apply the law and realize it's a possible lethal injection, are you going to do that based on a hair in a pair of pliers? There's just not enough information -- unless they're holding back some bombshell."

Chief Deputy District Attorney John Goold said prosecutors had put on "some of the evidence, but not all of it."

The defense has filed motions to try to exclude evidence from wiretaps on Peterson's phones, information from vehicle tracking devices and tracking dogs.

Just one call revealed.........

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

Mystery persists in Peterson case
NO WEAPON, WITNESSES PUT FORWARD; FULL AIRING OF

Posted on Sun, Nov. 23, 2003

Mystery persists in Peterson case
NO WEAPON, WITNESSES PUT FORWARD; FULL AIRING OF EVIDENCE AWAITS TRIAL

By Julia Prodis Sulek
Mercury News

MODESTO - Is that all there is?

After 12 days of testimony ended last week and piles of police reports were submitted into evidence to try to prove that Scott Peterson killed his pregnant wife and unborn son, that's the lingering question.

A hair, an affair and a fishing trip seemed about all that were needed to persuade a Stanislaus County judge to make Peterson stand trial sometime next year. But do prosecutors have enough evidence to convince a jury that Peterson killed his wife and dumped her body into San Francisco Bay last Christmas Eve?

The full evidence won't be made clear until the trial, expected next spring at the earliest. Last summer, though, Stanislaus County District Attorney James Brazelton promised that the evidence presented at the preliminary hearing would ``open some eyes.''

But Stanislaus County prosecutors produced no smoking gun. No weapon at all, actually. No eyewitness. No blood. And with so little left of Laci Peterson's body after 4 1/2 months in the water, they don't even know how she died.

The best evidence they presented is what most people knew before the hearing began: The 31-year-old fertilizer salesman was having an affair with a Fresno massage therapist and the bodies of his wife and unborn son both washed up within three miles of the Berkeley Marina, where he told police he had been fishing the day his wife disappeared.

It's no coincidence that Peterson was a free man for 4 1/2 months after his wife disappeared before being arrested.

``The reason was the police just didn't have enough of a case to bring him up on charges,'' said Loyola University law Professor Stan Goldman, who attended the preliminary hearing nearly every day as the legal editor for Fox News. ``What changed that is some extremely important evidence -- the bodies washed up right where he had given as his alibi. That is the key to the case for the prosecution.''

If prosecutors do have anything stronger, they're not telling. For a preliminary hearing, they didn't have to.

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.