Those who knew Peterson express shock

'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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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."

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.

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.

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.

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.

Thought you'd be interested in this excerpt from a different thread since it concerns the aspect of joint tenancy/rights of survivorship that we've been discussing about the Peterson home:

"...After his arrest, Peterson gave his parents power of attorney. That does not mean they can sell the house, however.

The title is in both names: Scott's and Laci's.

Generally speaking, in a joint tenancy, when one of the joint tenants dies, the property is divided up to the surviving tenants, said Dewey Weiford, Stanislaus Division president of Stewart Title of California. "However, the surviving joint tenant cannot be the cause of the deceased's death," he said.

Weiford noted that if a death certificate lists the cause of death as unknown or involving violence, the title and sales process is halted and the situation investigated.

Under the state Probate Code, if a joint tenant feloniously and intentionally kills another joint tenant, "the killer has no rights by survivorship." (end excerpt)

There's another call, too, that I'm confused about.

About a week ago we began hearing of how Scott called some friends on Dec. 24, to speak to them and finalize plans for New Year's Eve.

I assumed that this call was made before he "returned home and found that Laci was missing."

Heard on TV over the weekend, some reporter was claiming that this call about finalizing New Year's Eve plans was made AFTER Scott had gotten home, discovered Laci missing, and the alarm had been raised. True??!? He's calling friends about New Year's Eve plans--with his wife having just gone missing??!?

Do you really think the DA or the police are going to tell us the evidence before the trial? Surely you must see how odd and suspect his behavior has been since Laci disappeared.
I am confident the DA has the evidence and it will be revealed in a court of law which is the proper place.

You're right. Her letting him pick up her child, having known him about a month, that's kind of strange. Equally strange, I think, is that he was around to do it. I mean, I assume his interest was in Amber; the child was just incidental. Most men I know wouldn't be that familiar, that they would be taking care of little domestic details such as picking up the baby--at least, not so early in the relationship.

Also, look at how many pictures of Scott and Amber there are. And the pictures we see are not exactly ambiguous: there is a definite "trophy" quality to them. That is, it seems as though one or both of these people were declaring to the world, "This is my new steady."

Maybe, just maybe, we will find out that Scott and Amber knew one another before November 20.

Heard on TV over the weekend, some reporter was claiming that this call about finalizing New Year's Eve plans was made AFTER Scott had gotten home, discovered Laci missing,...

Welcome back.

No, the guy was just on one of the morning shows with his wife. I understood him to mean late afternoon when SP called about the New Years Eve plans. He did call them again, much later, after Laci was discovered missing. They said he left a "frantic" message on their machine saying that Laci was missing and wanted to know if they had seen her.

Hi you guys! I'm back. Thanks for noticing that I was gone! Death penalty for Laci's killer? Can't happen soon enough for me!

Hey, I've been catching up on this thread. Someone said they heard on TV that police are saying (privately, I take it) that she was strangled? Okay, but then why do we keep hearing that there was some blood found?

Not really anything that verifies it was a sexual relationship.

However, I watched Amber's shock press conference. She spit it all out in a hurry, and then got out of there. Part of what she said was to this effect: yes, I was involved with Scott Peterson, whom I didn't know was married... did I say I didn't know he was married? Because I didn't know he was married, you know... and yes, it was a ROMANTIC relationship.

So I got the impression she was trying to say, yes, we slept together, and that's all I'm gonna say about that.

Now stop that, Yeti. Poooor Amber!! You keep that up, and iconoclast and those other manly men who do things in manly ways are going to make you become an honorary member of the CABAL OF WOMEN on these threads! (That would probably just be the fox guarding the henhouse... but I digress... )

In 1975, Lee and Jackie Peterson started their own business, San Diego Crating & Packing.

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

Sherina Vincent--also known as Saki, according to Amber.

She took the pictures, and there was a pic of Sherina herself on the wall, so this was probably either Sherina's home, or, um, Sherina's mom's home.

Maybe at last we've found out who introduced this happy couple?

And what is with this couple, having so many pictures taken? If they had only just met? Since when does the picture-taking stage arrive so quickly?

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.