Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Peterson attorney wants $15,000 back
The Modesto Bee ^ | November 19, 2003 | John Cote' and Garth Stapely

Posted on 11/20/2003 6:04:54 AM PST by runningbear

Peterson attorney wants $15,000 back

Peterson attorney wants $15,000 back

By JOHN COTÉ and GARTH STAPLEY
BEE STAFF WRITERS

Last Updated: November 19, 2003, 08:20:52 AM PST

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.

The change of venue motion will be filed Dec. 3, Geragos said in court.

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.......

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

EMBATTLED STAR HIRES 'LACI' LAWYER

EMBATTLED STAR HIRES 'LACI' LAWYER

By HOWARD BREUER

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

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.

For Geragos, Jackson is but the latest in a substantial list of high-.........

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

Jacko taps top-shelf mouthpiece

Jacko taps top-shelf mouthpiece

By MAKI BECKER
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER


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."

..............................

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

Experts: Both Sides Will Use Amber Tapes in Peterson Case

Experts: Both Sides Will Use Amber Tapes in Peterson Case


Scott Peterson was having an affair with Amber Frey.

Bill Schechner

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.

"It goes to the motive," she said.

In the call Frey tells Peterson his stories don't add up.........

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

Missing 10 minutes could decide Peterson case

Missing 10 minutes could decide Peterson case Modesto Bee

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.

Peterson's Emerald Avenue warehouse is northwest of his home.

"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.

"That would be my understanding," Jacobson said.

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

The cell tower serving the Petersons' home has a radius .......

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

(Excerpt) Read more at modbee.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Extended News; Government; News/Current Events; US: California
KEYWORDS: avoidingchildsupport; baby; babyunborn; conner; connerpeterson; deathpenaltytime; dontubelievemyalibi; getarope; ibefishing; laci; lacipeterson; smallbaby; smallchild; sonkiller; unborn; wifekiller
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 161-175 next last
To: Republicus2001
pro bono - isn't that true?

An earlier thread mentioned Garegos would be paid one million dollars, and the Petersons and other family members had mortgaged their homes.

61 posted on 11/20/2003 11:56:46 AM PST by Lucy Lake
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: grizzfan
i forgot my sarcasm button
62 posted on 11/20/2003 12:05:56 PM PST by Republicus2001
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: runningbear
Well depends... depends on siezure and probability of show flight risks. Also, sure they could return the funds, after they check the serials, and photograph the loot! (which I am sure they have already done!) :o)

Exactly they could (and should) return the funds since the money itself has not been used in the crime they have charged. To KEEP it as evidence would imply to me that it was aquired or used as part of the crime.
If they want to use it as evidence of their therory of "planning to flee" then fine photograph it chromograph scan it, whatever. But it is going to be pointed out for sure that they have no PROOF he was fleeing at the time, no matter HOW suspicious it LOOKED.

63 posted on 11/20/2003 3:06:37 PM PST by alexandria
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: runningbear
GeraGROSS has been whacko jacko's lawyer since last March!
64 posted on 11/20/2003 4:08:50 PM PST by joyce11111
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cyncooper
You missed the point. The prosecution doesn't have to display "that" stack of bills at the trial. Any old $15,000 stack of money will work. The decomposed bodies are "evidence". Does the prosecution intend to wheel the bodies into the courtroom? Of course not.

And just suppose that a suspect/ arrestee has a dependent family at home. Can you justify the cops keeping LEGAL money as evidence when the family needs the money for groceries & rent? This isn't stolen money.

And, you suggest that Scott can claim the money when he's "acquitted". Surely you don't mean to suggest that it's OK for the state to STEAL the $15,000 even if he's guilty??

The cash suggests that Peterson was going to flee, but sure as heck doesn't prove it. There are reasonable explanations, such as anticipating that bank accounts are going to be frozen & not wanting to "announce" who he is by using a credit card/ check. Hair color change & a different car doesn't prove he was planning to flee; a reasonable explanation is that he just didn't want to be recognized when he went out to buy milk or cigarettes. Why he was carrying his mother's ID (if true), I don't have a clue. It's not like he could pass himself off as his mother & using his mother's ID isn't exactly hiding.

BTW, I think he's guilty. But I have a problem w/ cops locking up LEGALLY acquired money.
65 posted on 11/20/2003 4:09:36 PM PST by elli1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: alexandria
Alexandria I DO think they did sufficiently prove INTENT to flee by the number of things, eg: $15,000.00 CASH, differnt appearance, false id, different car, a passport in yet another name, a bunch of camping gear, 4 cell phones, climbing ropes, water purifier etc.. This evidence was and is still sufficient to keep him in jail with NO bail possible.
66 posted on 11/20/2003 4:22:11 PM PST by Canadian Outrage (All us Western Canuks belong South)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: elli1
You missed the point.

I didn't miss any points, nor did I say or imply some of the stuff you dreamt up.

LOL

If they are legally bound to turn it over they'll be ordered to. Since I don't anticipate that, I'll stand by my observation.

Also, for someone who seems to think it is others who have leapt to conclusions (erroneously, evident from your faulty train of "thought"), it appears to me---and I might be wrong, but you CAPITALIZE it every chance you get---that this money was legally Peterson's.

I don't think that has been established.

67 posted on 11/20/2003 4:25:17 PM PST by cyncooper ("The evil is in plain sight")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: elli1
We DON'T KNOW where the money came from. It may be legal, it may NOT be. Suppose it was stolen from his employer? They were looking into his employee expenditure records. There are things here we DON'T KNOW.
68 posted on 11/20/2003 4:25:56 PM PST by Canadian Outrage (All us Western Canuks belong South)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: elli1
My last post should say "It appears to me that you have concluded the money was legally Peterson's and I don't think that has been established."

Note: I have not concluded it was not legally his.

I haven't made any conclusion on the money, except it appears suspicious when taken in context with what else he had and the circumstance he was in.
69 posted on 11/20/2003 4:28:49 PM PST by cyncooper ("The evil is in plain sight")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: elli1
The prosecution doesn't have to display "that" stack of bills at the trial. Any old $15,000 stack of money will work.

Are you new to legal trials? Sure sounds like it.

70 posted on 11/20/2003 4:33:59 PM PST by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: Jackie-O
Thanks!
71 posted on 11/20/2003 8:32:52 PM PST by hergus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

OK, Reading more transcripts and dealing with the woman who introduced Amber to Scott(Shawn) the testimony reads that she states another female applied to work for Scott, and that's how they found out he was married. It goes on to say that when a phone call was placed to an employee of Scott's, that male employee wouldn't answer the question. Since when did Scott have employees, and what is this about applications--who is this male employee (could have been Scott I guess)?

MPD Det. Brocchini is testifying] " 20 Q. What did she tell you about that? 21 A. That on December 6, she found out from somebody 22 that worked in her company, that actually applied for a job 23 with Scott, that Scott was married, and he lived in Modesto, 24 and that was both different than what he had ever told Shawn 25 Sibley. 26 Q. Okay. Did she say what -- did she tell you what 27 she then did? 28 A. She called -- first she called one of Scott's 1162 1 employees and asked if the employee knew if Scott was 2 married, and he wouldn't -- he wouldn't tell her. He told 3 her to call Scott. So she called Scott herself. " ~~~~~~~~~

72 posted on 11/20/2003 10:06:48 PM PST by Rusty Roberts (RB and RG have memories like elephants, thankfallully for those of us who read but post infrequently)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: Rusty Roberts
Happy Snotty is now #2 in the list of freaks Mark G. represents. Kinda makes all 3 of them in the same class - wacko, the bullshit salesman and the streetwalker of all lawyers.

Yes, I hope they retain the 15 grand as evidence as it was that money and that money only that the accused double murderer was intending to run with.

None of this brings back poor Laci. Almost a year ago that we've all been thinking of her.
73 posted on 11/20/2003 11:17:21 PM PST by cry4justice (There's something to be said for a monopoly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: joyce11111
didn't know until the search warrant on Jacko's neverland place... Geragos, puke!!!

going to be I think a Scott Peterson slow news weekend....

74 posted on 11/21/2003 5:58:06 AM PST by runningbear (Lurkers beware, Freeping is public opinions based on facts, theories, and news online.......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: runningbear
Seems SP has a lot of extra time on his hands lately for letter writing. Since his letter's to Laci's friends and family are being turned over to LE, he has taken up writing love overdue thank you notes.

Dear XXXX Laundry Detergent People, I'm writing to say what an excellent product you have. I've used it since the beginning of married life, when my Mom told me it was the best. In fact, about seven months ago I spilled some red wine on my new white shirt. My wife started to berate me about my drinking problem. One thing lead to another and I ended up with a lot of her blood on my white shirt as well. I tried to get the stain out using a bargain detergent, but it just wouldn't work. I went to the store and got a bottle of liquid XXXX with bleach alternative and all of the stains came out! They came out so well, in fact, that the DNA tests were negative! I thank you, once again, for a great product. Well, gotta go, I have to write a letter to the Hefty bag people. Sincerely, Scott Peterson P.S. If you are a pretty lady, I am single, please submit photo.

75 posted on 11/21/2003 8:16:37 AM PST by ftriggerf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ftriggerf
love = long duh :(
76 posted on 11/21/2003 8:17:45 AM PST by ftriggerf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: ftriggerf
ROFL, ft! Good to see ya! I especially liked the P.S.
77 posted on 11/21/2003 1:51:07 PM PST by Sandylapper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: elli1
BTW, I think he's guilty. But I have a problem w/ cops locking up LEGALLY acquired money.

Same here, elli1. Say, you don't think Stanislaus County would invest that $15k (short term) and keep the interest, do you? That kind of makes me think about the $3 million Santa Barbara has of M. Jackson's money. Was it a cash bond? What do they do with that kind of money lying around? Put it in a safe or invest it? Who gets to keep the interest when he's found "not guilty"? Just stuff to think about, I guess.

78 posted on 11/21/2003 1:59:52 PM PST by Sandylapper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: Sandylapper
In most situations,bond is actuallly 10% of whatever is stated, so Jackson probably had to fork over 300,000 (still a good chunk of cash,lol).
79 posted on 11/21/2003 6:06:48 PM PST by Rusty Roberts (RB and RG have memories like elephants, thankfallully for those of us who read but post infrequently)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: Rusty Roberts
Thanks, Rusty! Wonder what counties do with that money? Put it in a lock box labeled "Bail money--do not touch"?
80 posted on 11/21/2003 8:55:22 PM PST by Sandylapper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 161-175 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson