'TIL MURDER DO THEM PART:
Scott Peterson, whose wedding photo appears on the cover of Star magazine (inset), didn't keep his marriage vows to Laci, who was pregnant when the philanderer took up with another woman.
Posted on 04/25/2003 6:16:53 AM PDT by runningbear
Those who knew Peterson express shock
San Diego native accused of murder was loving, they say.
'TIL MURDER DO THEM PART:
Scott Peterson, whose wedding photo appears on the cover of Star magazine (inset), didn't keep his marriage vows to Laci, who was pregnant when the philanderer took up with another woman.
Those who knew Peterson express shock
San Diego native accused of murder was loving, they say.
By Laura Mecoy
The Sacramento Bee
(Published Friday, April 25, 2003, 4:45 AM)
SAN DIEGO -- In his high school yearbooks, Scott Peterson displays his "pulverizing" golf swing and tells his classmates to "watch for me" after his 1990 graduation.
The young man who led his golf team to an undefeated season in 1990 was hoping his golf swing would bring him fame.
Instead, at age 30, he has become known as a philandering husband arrested with $10,000 in cash and charged with murdering his pregnant wife, Laci, and their unborn son.
Former classmates and others who watched Peterson grow up in San Diego wonder how the well-mannered youth they knew could be suspected of committing such a crime.
"I am having a very difficult time with this," family friend Joan Pernicano said, holding back tears. "The scary thing to me is if someone as responsible, as caring and as loving as him could do this, then any of our sons could."
Peterson has denied any role in his wife's Christmas Eve disappearance. Her fate was unknown until her remains and the remains of their unborn son washed ashore near Richmond two weeks ago.
Peterson was arrested a week ago in La Jolla, an exclusive beach area near the northern San Diego County suburbs where he grew up and where his parents and four of his siblings live.
Peterson, born Oct. 24, 1972, in San Diego, is the youngest of seven children. But he is the only child born to Lee and Jackie Peterson after they married in 1971, according to family friend Eric Salzmann.
The other six children -- four boys and two girls -- were from the couple's earlier marriages.
"Scott was kind of raised as an only child," Salzmann said. "Most of the other kids were older and were out of the house." By all accounts, the family was a close one that shared a love for recreational sports.
"As soon as they could fit a golf club in Scott's hand, he was out golfing with them," Pernicano said. "He also loved fishing." In 1975, Lee and Jackie Peterson started their own business, San Diego Crating & Packing. Their children occasionally worked for them, and Lee Peterson's son, Joe, runs the Poway business today.
The packing company provided a comfortable lifestyle for the family. They lived in Scripps Ranch, an upscale suburb east of La Jolla, while Scott Peterson attended elementary school.
Scott Peterson took piano lessons with his mother and joined Pernicano's Cub Scout troop.
"Scott was just a good kid who didn't get into trouble," Pernicano recalled. "My kid was in the canyon lighting bonfires, but Scott wasn't that kind of boy." When Scott entered fifth grade, she said, the Petersons moved to another northern San Diego suburb, Rancho Bernardo, and then to Rancho Santa Fe, where they had a one-story home with a guest house and pool in the back.
"We had little remote-control boats we raced in their pool," Salzmann recalled.
Scott Peterson's parents sent their son across town to University of San Diego High School, a private Catholic school adjacent to the college.
Scott Peterson joined the school's golf team, playing the first two years in the shadow of Phil Mickelson, who would become a top PGA player.
Mickelson has said he doesn't remember Scott Peterson. But the high school's golf coach, Dave Thoennes, has said Scott Peterson stepped in to take over as the team's leader after Mickelson graduated in 1988.
Scott Peterson was twice named the team's most valuable player and was named three times to The San Diego Tribune's All-Academic Team.
While one teammate remembered Peterson as arrogant and a loner, others said they recalled him as outgoing and helpful.
"He always went to all the little dances and functions," former teammate Brian Tasto said. "He had good character, good friends and came from a good family." Tasto said Peterson was never "hot-headed" or showed signs of a temper.
"He never hung out with a bad crowd," Tasto said. "Everybody asks if there is some underlying issue, and the answer is no. That is what creates the shock for us."
After graduation, Scott Peterson went to Arizona State University on a partial golf scholarship but stayed there only a short time.
Salzmann said Scott Peterson missed his parents. They had moved to Morro Bay, and he moved back in with them.
His parents declined to be interviewed because, they said, their son is "in legal jeopardy." In earlier interviews, however, Jackie Peterson said her youngest child moved out after six months.
Scott Peterson began working three jobs to put himself through.
Guilty Until Proven Innocent?:
Why Scott Peterson's Guilt Remains Far From Obvious
Jonna Spilbor
EXCERPTED:
On April 19, not far from the home once shared by Scott and Laci Peterson, California law enforcement officials gathered for a news conference while the nation braced itself in anticipation. Four months of waiting - and hoping - would now come to an end. Authorities were confident that the bodies that had washed up on shore in San Francisco would be identified as those of Laci Peterson and her unborn child.
The announcement left many deeply saddened, of course, but not altogether shocked. The police had subtly prepared us for the worst long before the official announcement.
What was quite shocking, in my professional opinion, was the decision to charge Scott Peterson with murder. But my shock, I soon learned, would not be shared by all.
The History of the Peterson Case
As many readers will recall, it was last Christmas Eve that Laci Peterson vanished from her home in Modesto, California. She was nearly eight months pregnant at the time, and due to give birth to her first child, Conner, on February 10, 2003.
News of Laci's disappearance made immediate headlines. Soon, strangers from across the country would come to feel they knew Laci Peterson almost as if she were an old friend. The beautiful smile of this mother-to-be shone through, even in grainy pictures on television screens.
As days gave way to weeks, images of a woman very much alive spilled warmly into our living rooms. Often, they were accompanied by the prayerful pleas of her parents, in-laws, and siblings requesting - at times, even commanding - Laci's safe return home.
We all waited for their prayers to be answered.
But on March 5, the Laci Peterson case, previously a "missing persons" investigation, was publicly reclassified as a homicide investigation.
And on April 13 and 14, the bodies of a full-term fetus and a woman, respectively, washed up on the shore of San Francisco Bay. Images of blue, Bay-soaked body bags were looping frequently on television screens. Many observers, including myself, held their breath. While we were uncertain as to whom the lifeless bodies belonged, we knew who we hoped they would not be.
On April 18, before the remains were positively identified, Scott Peterson was arrested for the murder of his wife and unborn child. On April 19, as noted above, the decision to charge Peterson was announced. And on April 24, California prosecutors confirmed their intent to seek the death penalty.
Two Sharply Different Views on Peterson's Arrest
Police and prosecutors had barely left the podium before I was whisked away to a well-known cable news network. There, I spent the morning providing legal commentary on the arrest of Scott Peterson from a criminal defense perspective.
The familiar greenroom was filled with an equally familiar sea of faces; a private investigator in one corner; a former police chief in another; and of course a smattering of prosecutors. I sat down next to another "legal expert" and colleague of mine to exchange thoughts on the case before going live.
My first comment went something like this: "Can you believe police actually arrested Scott Peterson so soon? Boy, they really jumped the gun this time!"
Suddenly, the pearly white teeth of my colleague disappeared behind a scowl. His eyes narrowed slightly, and his head cocked just as my pet pooch's does when he is confused by the sounds coming out of my mouth. Then he spoke: "Don't you mean to say, you can't believe he did it? C'mon. Scott Peterson is as guilty as they come."
It was time to do my own confused pooch imitation. With my head titled in a mirror image of my friend's, I continued: "Guilty? How can you say a person is guilty simply because he's been charged? It is a giant leap between arrest and conviction, my friend. I don't know whether Scott Peterson is guilty, and neither do you. What I do know, is there seems to be little physical evidence to support the charges at this point. That's all I'm saying."
Just then, the room which had been abuzz with shop talk when I arrived, became completely silent. I could tell I was alone in my view; the other guests clearly disapproved.
Again, I was somewhat taken by surprise. Not only did I believe what I was saying, I thought it hewed very closely to the facts. After all, no prosecutor or lawyer could credibly claim that the case against Scott Peterson is - based on publicly-disclosed evidence at least - anything but circumstantial.
The main evidence against him is that the location where he said he was fishing, was a few miles from where the two bodies were discovered. That's bad - but for now, that's it. It doesn't sound like "beyond a reasonable doubt" to me. Peterson could be guilty; but he could be the victim of a horrible coincidence, as well.
Finally, after a few seconds which seemed more like hours, one voice broke the awkward silence with this question: "How can you possibly defend someone so guilty?"
Never before had a greenroom been such a cold and scary place. I didn't have a chance to give a full answer then, but I can try to give one now.
Why the Presumption of Innocence Counts Outside the Courtroom Too
Of course, Scott Peterson, like all others in our country who are criminally accused, is presumed innocent until proven guilty. That crucial presumption comes from the right to a fair trial, which has its roots in the weave of the Constitution's Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Amendments.
Laws on fetal slaying are complex, evolving
Scott Peterson
EXCERPTED:
Laws on fetal slaying are complex, evolving
By Michael Doyle -- Bee Washington Bureau
Published 2:15 a.m. PDT Thursday, April 24, 2003
WASHINGTON -- Baby Girl Vogt died years ago on a California mountain road, a ghastly step in the legal path that permits Scott Peterson to be charged with murdering his unborn son.
In a country where legal abortions are commonplace, fetal protections can only be described as complex. These complexities and conflicts are highlighted when, as in the Peterson case, police charge someone with murdering the not-yet-born.
"It helps bring into focus what the argument is about," Douglas Johnson, legislative director of the National Right to Life Committee, said of the Peterson case Wednesday. "And the argument is, do these types of crimes have one victim or two?"
In fact, the double-murder charges lodged against Peterson showcase a legal evolution that's still under way.
Twenty-six states, including California, explicitly permit someone to be charged with killing a fetus. The states differ in their definitions, though. Fourteen, like Utah and Missouri, cover the fetus at any state of development; the other 12, including California, cover only those fetuses that have reached a certain level of development.
Oklahoma law, for instance, covers any "unborn quick child," or viable fetus, while California protects a fetus that has passed the "embryonic stage."
This is generally pegged at seven or eight weeks. Laci Peterson was about eight months pregnant when she was killed.
In Congress, legislation backed by nine conservative Republican senators would likewise permit federal homicide or manslaughter charges against someone who kills any fetus while committing another violent federal crime. Abortions would be exempted.
"The fact is that it is just plain wrong that our federal government does absolutely nothing to criminalize violent acts against unborn children," Sen. Mike DeWine, R-Ohio, said on introducing the bill. "We cannot allow criminals to get away with murder."
DeWine cited an Ohio-based Air Force enlisted man who beat his pregnant wife and thereby killed the 8-month-old fetus she was carrying. Military prosecutors were initially unable, under existing military and federal law, to charge the man with murder. Ultimately, they employed Ohio state law to accomplish the same purpose.
The House of Representatives in 2001 approved similar legislation by a 252-172 vote, but the issue has become so entangled in the larger abortion rights debate that the measure's political prospects remain unclear.
The Peterson murder case makes the issue even trickier, for some.
A spokeswoman for the National Organization for Women said Wednesday that the normally outspoken group would not discuss the legislation out of respect for the Peterson family. In the past, though, the organization has vigorously fought unborn-victim statutes.
In California's case, the law has its roots in the tragedy involving a 5-pound, 18-inch-long fetus dubbed Baby Girl Vogt.
Teresa Keeler, the mother, was living in Stockton with a man named Ernest Vogt. In February 1969, her former husband, Robert Harrison Keeler, encountered her on a narrow road in Amador County and became enraged upon discovering her pregnancy.
"He said, 'You sure are (pregnant). I'm going to stomp it out of you,' " according to documents from the California Supreme Court. "He pushed her against the car, shoved his knee into her abdomen, and struck her in the face with several blows."
The fetus was delivered stillborn at a Stockton hospital.
Physicians testified they were reasonably certain that the fetus had developed to the point of viability, and Keeler's ex-husband was charged with murder.
But as Associate Justice Stanley Mosk noted in an influential opinion, Keeler's husband could be guilty of murder only if a fetus was "a human being within the meaning of the statute." Mosk further determined the California lawmakers who wrote the state's first statute against murder, in 1850, didn't intend to protect a fetus.
Reports of Damaging Evidence Against Scott Peterson
MODESTO — Police have evidence that Scott Peterson devised home-made anchors to sink his wife's body in San Francisco Bay. A crime report, apparently released by accident, indicates that the killing occurred at the Peterson home in Modesto.
Snip it:
Attorneys In Peterson Case Square Off
'Two Sides Make Formidable Attorneys'
DA Jim Brazelton
Public Defender Ken Faulkner
EXCERPTED:
Attorneys In Peterson Case Square Off
'Two Sides Make Formidable Attorneys'
Karen Brown
POSTED: 10:33 p.m. PDT April 24, 2003
UPDATED: 10:50 p.m. PDT April 24, 2003
MODESTO, Calif. -- The Scott Peterson trial has not started, but that has not stopped attorneys on both sides from speaking out about the case.
Scott Peterson remains in jail, but much of his fate now lies in the hands of his new attorney, Ken Faulkner, NBC11's Karen Brown reported.
Another high profile attorney in Modesto describes Faulkner as a nuts and bolts kind of guy who will provide a vigorous defense.
The same attorney described the district attorney's office as always formidable and now both sides are facing off, Brown said.
On the one side of the Laci Peterson murder case, you have a former police officer, turned prosecutor, and his team of attorneys in the Stanislaus DA's office.
"In my opinion, it's a case that cries out for a death penalty consideration," said Jim Brazelton, the Stanislaus County district attorney.
And on the other side, you have a veteran public defender with over 20 years of experience in private practice that is irritated with the DA for making public comments about the case.
"Well, I think it's unfortunate. Mr. Braselton said that he wanted Mr. Peterson to get a fair trial and I think he's doing everything he can to prevent that," said Kent Faulkner, the deputy public defender.
New Information About Scott Peterson's Affair
Scott and Amber
New information is surfacing about Scott Peterson's affair with Amber Frey.
Channel 5 has obtained a photo of the couple, taken before a holiday party two weeks before Laci disappeared. Sources also tell Channel 5 that on December 23rd, Frey called the Peterson home and Laci reportedly answered the phone.
Meantime, Stanislaus County District Attorney Jim Brazelton says he "absolutely" would like to pursue the death penalty against Scott Peterson. But Brazelton said he won't decide without talking to Laci Peterson's family.
"In my opinion, it's a death penalty case," he said. "But we're not going to make that decision until we have all the input."
Since his arrest for the murder of his wife and unborn son, Scott Peterson has been living in a six-by-nine foot cell at the Stanislaus County Jail. His only visitors so far have been his parents.
Jail guards allow the 30-year-old to spend 90 minutes twice a week in the exercise yard. But Peterson draws some attention from the other inmates.
"They just make cat calls, and they'll say things to try to taunt him," said Kelly Huston of the Stanislaus County Sheriff's Department. "That's not unlike a lot of the things that go on within that tier. People in our maximum security area are people facing serious charges, like Scott, or who are disciplinary problems."
Scott Peterson has pleaded not guilty to two counts of murder with special circumstances.
» 04-24-2003
(Excerpt) Read more at fresnobee.com ...
I think her hairdresser is the one who is probably possessed. The 1980s are over, hon, over. Let it go!
Well, Sunshine, you see... sometimes some people have to, uh, give up some things so that the rest of us can benefit. But don't worry, her Power lives on in Ava. : - )
You better quit thinking about Ava or you are gonna have nightmares tonite.
Seriously, that is a really good question!
Brings to mind the word "slime" when I see those pictures of him. I'm sure more words come to mind, but not printable here!!
Only if Laci and SP held title as "Tenants in common" with no "right of survivorship". The "ROS" is fairly new in conjunction with "TIC" but they are fairly new homeowners and it may apply in their case. "Joint Tenancy" has always had the "ROS" attached to it. In your probate books, look up "joint tenancy" and you will see how the surviving spouse automatically recives the deceased's interest in the property.
That interest cannot be willed, meaning the surviving spouse has priority over any interest that is mistakenly willed to another. As in a spouse who didn't understand the particulars of "JT" and sat down and wrote out a freehand will leaving her 1/2 interest to a sister. If they were "JT" the surviving spouse would recive the wife's 1/2 interest inspite of the will.
"Daddy, It's coming, Daddy. I can feel It.
It won't be long now."
Bad news, though. You're right its a dog, not a cat. Had to blow it up to tell for sure.
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.