Posted on 05/31/2003 8:41:50 AM PDT by runningbear
"What I've garnered from the various press reports was that the "defense" set that Tuesday date for Sharon to enter the home under strict guidelines set by the *defense*. Press reports indicated that the *defense* team would accompany Sharon and videotape her visit to the home and record everything she did and every item she touched or wanted removed from the home."
The articles say that there was an agreement upon the date by the parties. It does not state that the defense dictated the date, especially for some nefarious reason. I believe that there was an intent to document what was removed from the home. This is not surprising nor objectionable considering that there is a capital murder case involved. It is also not unusual. In other criminal and civil cases that I am aware of, there have been times that this has been done by both by the prosecution or complainants and the defense or respondants.
"...I this were me....this would have been an unacceptable scenario! How on earth could she have walked into her dead daughter's home with *defense* cameras recording her heartbreak?"
And if it were you and you objected then you or your attorney would be free to reject the agreement. There was no intent to document her grief, besides her grief has already been documented by the press with Sharon Rocha's permission and cooperation. As to the camera phobia, the press was clearly informed prior to the entry. The press was on site before the Rochas arrived and have described the trucks arrival at the Peterson residence. Clearly Geragos and the defense did not call the press. They knew nothing about the impending break in. It is doubtful that the attorneys for the Rochas called the press, they advised her earlier not to enter the home and by informing they press the would be in ethical breach. Besides they deny it. I for one, believe them. That leaves only the Rochas themselves.
"I'm quite sure that cameras were not present when the Peterson's entered. Why should the Rocha's be subjected to such a humiliating injustice?"
True, but then there would be no reason to believe that the Petersons bear any angst or rancor toward the defendant in this case. The same cannot be said for the Rocha family. They have openly displayed their feelings for the defendant, understandably so. However, the defense was doing what it is required to do by the Bar's Code of Ethics and the law---acting in the best interest of their client.
"The defense team is now stating that there was a "deal"...perhaps the defense said: this is the deal take it or leave it...and the Rocha's chose to leave it".
Actually the Rocha's attorneys are stating the there was a deal and complaining that Geragos and the defense withdrew the deal. I suppose you can say the "Rochas chose to leave it", but if that was their choice they should not have agreed to it in the first place. To unilaterally revoke it with no notice to the other party involved, is a breech of ehics, an affront to honest negotiation and smacks of a deliberate deception by the Rochas.
Sharon Rocha had an opportunity to revoke or "leave" the deal as you put it on the Greta program. She did not. Instead she deliberately chose not to mention the deal at all. She chose to claim that she was being denied any entry by Jackie Peterson, making Mrs. Peterson out to be callous, indifferent and vindictive. The record clearly shows that this was not true and Mrs. Rocha knew it.
"Al Clark(One of two of the Rocha's attorneys): "We thought we had it worked out with Geragos that Sharon could come in Laci's home next Tuesday". "He (Geragos)called...on Thursday and said he's not going to allow anyone in the house...."
And I've stated no different.
What you are ignoring is the Greta program appearance by Sharon Rocha on Wednesday night effectively denying that any access was being provided to her. That was the precipitant for the Geragos withdrawl of the deal Thursday morning.
Again, what Jackie says the jewelry was doing there....don't mind me if I wait to hear a disintersted party confirm first before I believe her. Too many of her statements have been outright lies to take this at face value.
I think the jeweler just may have contacted the Rochas. Modesto isn't Los Angeles, and public sympathy for Laci's family is running pretty high. I'd be interested to learn when the jewelry was turned over to the jewelry store.
Jackie has a real problem with the truth. In fact she has character issues. Yeah, duuuuh...
Who is Janey married to? Besides Maw and Pa, she seems to be the only other Peterson speaking out. In some families there is a "code of silence". They know where the skeletons are buried, so to speak, but they stick together and keep their mouths shut. Quite common in dysfunctional families...
With everything else being talked about, I forgot all about this. Aiding and abetting, acomplices after the crime? I think maybe Jackie and Lee might want to think about dying their hair and making a run for the border??? Maybe that's why most of the family is laying low...
"We want those," Peterson said. She said the Rochas picked them up from the jeweler.
The Rocha family could not be reached for comment.
Above from post #84, this thread. I could not determine by whom nor when the rings were taken to the jeweler, but just saw a Fox reporter on Tony Snow's program, suggest that the rings were taken in by the Petersons at Scott's request. I took that to mean "Jackie/Lee". No hint as to when.
don't we wish we could have warned her ...
She probably wouldn't have listened : (
This is when the Rochas went on Greta. Bowing to pressure from that appearance Geragos tosses them a bone for the next Tuesday.
Defense lawyer Mark Geragos says he has worked out an agreement to let Laci Peterson's family visit the house and remove her journals, a food processor and a watering can that said "Laci's Garden."
So Geragos tells Clark the Rochas can go in the following Tuesday, failing to mention that they will only be allowed to take three items. Then Clark hears, possibly through the media, about the reduction in the number of items that they will be allowed to take. An argument ensues between the attorneys on Thursday about the "agreement".
Further agitating the situation is the defense leaking of the autopsy. Geragos makes his "wanting war" statement and cancels his token agreement with the Rocha's attorney.
Sharon Rocha, having access to the home and no order restraining her from doing so, decides to retrieve certain items already outlined in the previous 22 point list. Geragos has the list. And Sharon had a key.
The Rochas played it straight up. It was Geragos who was playing games. IMO...
"The[y] said they had faxed the Peterson's and their attorney four times with no response."
The night Sharon Rocha was on Greta, she knew that a deal had been made to allow her to enter the Peterson home. How can she say that they were upset that they were not allowed inside Laci's house and in the same breath say that they have tried repeatedly to contact the Peterson's and their attorney with no response?
The agreement was infact in place at the very moment she was making these claims and had been prior to her appearance. She was a participant in the negotiations that resulted in the agreement. She knew an agreement to enter Laci's home had already been made. A better example of a disengenuous statement would be hard to find.
The morning following her appearance on Greta, Rocha's own attorney says that she was upset that Gergaros had withdrawn the defense's agreement that very morning.
Just as a point of interest, it seems to me that this sentiment got lost somewhere along the way.
That there was an agreeement is not even a question. Rocha's own attorneys say so. They also say that Gergaros backed out of the agreement the day after Rochas appearance on Gretas show.
Your statement that Gergaros "failed to mention that they will only be allowed to take three items" is unadulterated garbage. Rochas attorneys have stated that Sharon Rocha had originally submitted a list of 22 items that she would like from the home. During the negotiations to arrive at the agreement, this list was reduced by Sharon Rocha to 11 items.
You must be living in a cave or only get your news from these threads.
It was a token agreement that didn't last a day. Geragos canceled it. Show me where anything exists that reflects an agreement was made prior to the Greta show. Don't bother with the fax/email thing, that was from Sharon with no response from the defense. No response means just that . How you comprehend that to mean that they were negotiating is ludicrous.
Rochas attorneys have stated that Sharon Rocha had originally submitted a list of 22 items that she would like from the home.
Yeah I said that and Geragos said NO! That's a matter of record.
Your statement that Gergaros "failed to mention that they will only be allowed to take three items" is unadulterated garbage.
Geragos made the statement regarding the three items not me.
You must be living in a cave or only get your news from these threads.
I'll take my cave over your vacuum anyday.
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.