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

Skip to comments.

Ruling is expected today on search warrants
The Modesto Bee ^ | June 12, 2003 | John Cote'

Posted on 06/12/2003 7:46:23 AM PDT by runningbear

Ruling is expected today on search warrants

Ruling is expected today on search warrants

By JOHN COTÉ
BEE STAFF WRITER

Published: June 12, 2003, 06:26:28 AM PDT

A Stanislaus County Superior Court judge is expected to rule today on whether to unseal eight search warrants issued while police investigated Scott Peterson in the death of his pregnant wife, Laci.

Judge Roger M. Beauchesne held a closed hearing Friday after defense attorney Matt Dalton said releasing the documents would compromise evidence that points to the "real killers."

"We have information that could possibly affect the arrest of other suspects who are still out there," Dalton said during a hearing last week.

Beauchesne sealed the documents before Peterson was arrested April 18 and charged with two counts of murder in the deaths of his wife, Laci, and their unborn son, Conner.

Beauchesne had originally ordered the documents to be unsealed when a criminal complaint was filed in the case. But the 5th District Court of Appeal in Fresno overruled that segment of his order after prosecutors sought to keep the documents sealed. The appeals court ruled that the unsealing could not come automatically after an arrest. Rather, a hearing had to be held after a "change in circumstances," the court ruled.

Prosecutors say intense media scrutiny could sway potential jurors and hurt Peterson's chances at a fair trial.

The Bee's lawyer, Charity Kenyon -- who also represents several other newspapers and TV.......................

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

Peterson's Attorneys Examine Human Remains

Peterson's Attorneys Examine Human Remains

DNA Tests To Determine Identity

POSTED: 8:30 a.m. EDT June 11, 2003
UPDATED: 8:59 a.m. EDT June 11, 2003

DAVIS, Calif. -- Scott Peterson's defense team was in Davis, Calif., Monday, looking into the possibility that human remains that were found there last week may have a connection to their case.

NBC news reported that the remains were in a plastic container found inside a trailer park trash bin last week. So far, they have not been identified.

Reports say the remains include at least one female, and perhaps as many as four other individuals.

Authorities say DNA tests will be done to establish whether or not there is any connection to the Laci Peterson murder case.

Meanwhile, if Scott Peterson's attorneys have their way, an unlikely witness will testify at a hearing scheduled for the end of this month, NBC News in San Francisco reported.

Peterson's defense team announced Tuesday that they want the judge who authorized wiretaps on Peterson's phone to take the stand.

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

Peterson's Attorneys Want Unlikely Witness To Testify
Judge Ray Ledine Authorized Wiretaps

Peterson's Attorneys Want Unlikely Witness To Testify
Judge Ray Ledine Authorized Wiretaps

Jodi Hernandez

POSTED: 9:39 p.m. PDT June 10, 2003
UPDATED: 11:37 p.m. PDT June 10, 2003

MODESTO, Calif. -- Scott Peterson is due back in court at the end of the month. And if his attorneys have their way, an unlikely witness will testify. Peterson's attorneys subpoenaed a superior court judge to appear.

Peterson's defense team announced Tuesday that they want the judge who authorized wiretaps on Peterson's phone to take the stand.

NBC11's Jodi Hernandez reported that Peterson's attorneys might face an uphill battle on this issue.

Ray Ledine authorized the wiretapping of Peterson's phone conversations. The judge met with the prosecutor and wiretap investigator every three days to keep tabs on their progress. A court reporter was not present at those meetings and Peterson's attorneys want to question the judge about the wiretap procedures.

They are concerned that conversations between Peterson and his attorney were illegally recorded. Legal experts say it's extremely rare for a judge to take the stand. Judges are protected by law from doing so.

"They can submit to him written questions and you can submit written answers," said legal expert Alexander Wolfe.

Hernandez reported that in a death penalty case the law requires a court reporter to be present at every court proceeding, including conferences. But when the judge met with investigators about the wiretaps.......

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

On a side note a PSA:

Reward Offered in Girl's Killing

Reward Offered in Girl's Killing

Posted: June 11, 2003 at 9:07 p.m.

CASTRO VALLEY, Calif. (AP) -- A $5,000 reward was announced Wednesday by the Alameda County sheriff's department for any information that could help identify a teenage girl whose decomposing body was found inside a canvas bag behind a restaurant on May 1.

Investigators have eliminated about 150 missing children from the San Francisco Bay area, said Sgt. Scott Dudek. They suspect the girl may be from out of the state.

"The reward is offered by the Carole Sund/Carrington Foundation to assist us with identifying who the little girl was," Dudek said. "We have her DNA, we were able to eliminate other children based on her characteristics. She had beautiful teeth, no fillings, no cavities, single ear piercing, and other distinctive characteristics."

An employee of a Carrow's restaurant found the body and notified authorities.

Dudek describe the victim as a 5-foot-1 inch girl who weighed 110 pounds, had brown eyes, brown and wavy hair and of mixed race, Hispanic and black.

He said the cause of death had been established as asphyxiation, as "a rug was found inside her mouth." The girl likely died April 22 or 23, Dudek said.

"It could be a person outside of the area, outside of the state, there is a possibility that perhaps maybe a family member had something to do with it and that is why they have not reported it yet," Dudek added.

Anyone with information is encouraged to contact the Homicide Division of the Alameda County Sheriff's Office at (510) 667-7721/

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


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Extended News; Government; News/Current Events; US: California
KEYWORDS: lacipeterson
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 221-240 next last
To: Howlin
Hey...did you see This ? Unrelated....
61 posted on 06/12/2003 12:07:53 PM PDT by hobbes1 ( Hobbes1TheOmniscient® "I know everything so you don't have to" ;)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: hobbes1
Oh happy day! I love Dennis Miller!!!! Glad Fox got him!
62 posted on 06/12/2003 12:08:41 PM PDT by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: hobbes1
Labine allegedly issued the warrant allowing Scott Peterson's phones to be tapped from Jan.10 to April 18

And why wouldn't they? It was obvious at that point in time that not one word of what Scott Peterson had told them was true.

63 posted on 06/12/2003 12:09:38 PM PDT by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
Well generally, and I could be wrong on this, but isn't it proper to to accumulate EVIDENCE then fit it to suspect, not find a Suspect, then fit the evidence to him?
64 posted on 06/12/2003 12:12:16 PM PDT by hobbes1 ( Hobbes1TheOmniscient® "I know everything so you don't have to" ;)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: hobbes1
Yes, it is. And we still haven't seen what the prosecution has; but whatever it is, they had enough to get search warrants and wiretaps.
65 posted on 06/12/2003 12:16:46 PM PDT by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
Hmmmmmmmmm....

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/927864/posts
66 posted on 06/12/2003 12:20:40 PM PDT by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
However, and that gets to my point, sometimesn the way the get them is rather flimsy.

(LIke Vanatters warrant for the Rockingham Property that was willfully false in almost EVERY respect...)
67 posted on 06/12/2003 12:21:47 PM PDT by hobbes1 ( Hobbes1TheOmniscient® "I know everything so you don't have to" ;)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
LOL!!!! I wonder if he will show up to work on SP's "innocence project".
68 posted on 06/12/2003 12:21:58 PM PDT by melodie (Phew!!! Now I know why people call this place Humidston.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: hobbes1
But I am awfully fond of that whole thing about making the GOVERNMENT actually PROVE things beyond a reasonable doubt

And the many sleazy tricks used to defend the Clintonistas in the past SHOULD disturb us, as MizSterious implied in saying that Geragos (a true Clintonista) disturbed her.

You want to talk about accountability by those involved in a legal matter? In what way was it legitimate for a lawyer such as Bruce Lindsey, or his partners, to provide affidavits, which sometimes did not accurately reflect the facts known to a female former sex partner of a civil-suit defendant, in order to deny a plaintiff her fair access to the courts? There's a thin line btw defending someone zealously, and letting one's zeal override one's obligations of fairness. And it is not only the GOVERNMENT which sometimes oversteps the bounds of fairness in legal cases.

IMO, MizSterious was correct in deploring the use of Clintonista tactics in this murder case--zealous defense or not.

People never tire of complaining of the sleaziness of lawyers. Yet when they see someone like Geragos or Johnny Cochran turning legal representation into another form of the Daley vote-fixing schemes, they applaud. It doesn't make sense--which is probably why most lawyers simply tune out the broken-record-like complaints of the public.

69 posted on 06/12/2003 12:23:41 PM PDT by Devil_Anse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: hobbes1
Who paid the police to "fixate" on Geragos' client? Or what was their motivation? Was it "Get Scott Peterson" month down at the MPD?
70 posted on 06/12/2003 12:24:51 PM PDT by Devil_Anse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: hobbes1
Of COURSE Geragos need not prove anything!! So WHY did Geragos make public announcements, full of fanfare, that he was going to SOLVE this murder case, and that they "knew" who did it??
71 posted on 06/12/2003 12:26:27 PM PDT by Devil_Anse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: hobbes1
Why tap his phones? Maybe b/c if Laci had been kidnapped, the logical person for the kidnapper to contact to try to get ransom, would be her husband?
72 posted on 06/12/2003 12:28:03 PM PDT by Devil_Anse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: melodie; runningbear; hobbes1
Judge said in his ruling that the media DID prove their case for the warrants to be unsealed.
73 posted on 06/12/2003 12:30:40 PM PDT by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: hobbes1
WHO's comfortable with "the police knowing best"?? That's why they had a JUDGE supervising the police!

So now the judge doesn't "know best", either. So next time they'd better have a congressman supervising HIM. And they can get a senator to supervise the congressman, and the president can supervise the senator, and Kofi Annan can supervise the president...
74 posted on 06/12/2003 12:30:44 PM PDT by Devil_Anse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: Devil_Anse
Any reaonable thinking person would conclude that the LADA lost the Simpson case.


Johnnie is not to blame for their incompetence.

As for overstepping the bounds, that should be punished severely, however, offending people, because they are in a rush to stampede to aguilty verdict is hardly overstepping the bounds....
75 posted on 06/12/2003 12:31:39 PM PDT by hobbes1 ( Hobbes1TheOmniscient® "I know everything so you don't have to" ;)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: hobbes1
If that was to hold any water, the Tap would not have been surreptitious, now would it?

Yes it would. This is the same guy who required the police to get search warrants before letting them into the house to search for clues in his wife's disappearance. Catching kidnappers need not come with the cooperation of the next of kin as it is the people of California who want the kidnappers apprehended.

Because we "think' something may be going on

You are not accurate in paraphrasing my second reason. His own words stating that he knew who did it hardly qualifies as a fishing expedition. The next of kin tells his secret girlfriend that he knows who is responsible for his wife's disappearance and you call that fishing? (And the police have it on tape...from Amber's willing phone tap)

76 posted on 06/12/2003 12:32:46 PM PDT by RGSpincich
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: Devil_Anse
Who Paid the Police to focus on OJ, less than 3 hours after the discovery of a crime scene?


Who knows, Lazy maybe....
77 posted on 06/12/2003 12:32:46 PM PDT by hobbes1 ( Hobbes1TheOmniscient® "I know everything so you don't have to" ;)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: RGSpincich
This is the same guy who required the police to get search warrants before letting them into the house

As well they should. He has a legal right to document WHY they are in his home...

78 posted on 06/12/2003 12:34:44 PM PDT by hobbes1 ( Hobbes1TheOmniscient® "I know everything so you don't have to" ;)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: hobbes1
Great analogy... OJ.

His zealous defense team forced the state to prove its case. The rest is history... the system worked.

Unless, of course, a couple of those jurors were paid off....naaahhhhh...
79 posted on 06/12/2003 12:35:15 PM PDT by Devil_Anse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: hobbes1
If you're saying that the state can never have a good reason to apply to a judge/magistrate for a warrant, and tap someone's phone, why don't you get to work with Congress and have the federal laws changed on the grounds that they are unconstitutional? The state laws will then have to fall in behind.
80 posted on 06/12/2003 12:38:04 PM PDT by Devil_Anse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 221-240 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