Posted on 07/15/2004 5:57:30 AM PDT by runningbear
Seeking mistrial, Peterson seizes on previous accusations against detective
Seeking mistrial, Peterson seizes on previous accusations against detective
Scott Peterson's defense wants a mistrial because of previous allegations against Detective Allen Brocchini, who testified at length last month.
By Harriet Ryan
Court TV
REDWOOD CITY, Calif. — A detective accused of embellishing his testimony at Scott Peterson's murder trial was previously accused of making inflammatory statements on the witness stand to force a mistrial in a case where the prosecution's evidence was crumbling.
To bolster motions for a mistrial and dismissal of all charges, Peterson's defense cited Modesto police detective Allen Brocchini's conduct in a 1998 robbery trial.
The defense motions are based on testimony Brocchini offered last month about a sensational, and ultimately uncorroborated, tip.
A hearing on the motions was to be held behind closed doors Wednesday morning, but Judge Alfred Delucchi postponed the hearing to July 29 and lawyers for the media convinced the judge to conduct most of the proceeding in public. Certain areas of the argument the judge has already sealed will take place privately.
Story continues..........
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Laci Peterson (Resending)
Peterson lawyer seeks dismissal of charges after cop's testimony questioned
(Redwood City, California-AP) -- Scott Peterson's lawyer is seeking a mistrial or the dismissal of all charges against the accused wife-killer.
Mark Geragos (GER'-ah-guhs) told the judge yesterday that a Modesto, California, police detective lied on the stand about the details of a conversation he'd had with an alleged tipster.
Detective Allen Brocchini (broh-KEE'-nee) testified that a tipster had claimed Peterson described to him how he would dump a dead body.........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lawyers in Peterson murder trial argue over previous testimony by detective
Lawyers in Peterson murder trial argue over previous testimony by detective
BRIAN SKOLOFF, Associated Press Writer
Wednesday, July 14, 2004
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(07-14) 15:58 PDT REDWOOD CITY, Calif. (AP) --
Lawyers in Scott Peterson's murder trial Wednesday argued over previous testimony that defense attorneys said shows a detective lied on the stand.
Judge Alfred A. Delucchi had planned to discuss a motion on that issue and other matters behind closed doors, but appeals from media lawyers resulted in a public debate.
In the process, Delucchi revealed in court -- without the jury present -- two topics at issue: whether a detective fabricated parts of his testimony and the admissibility of television interviews Peterson took part in before his arrest.
The judge deferred a decision, instead scheduling a future hearing to discuss whether lawyers could argue their positions publicly without revealing sensitive information. He has been inclined to discuss such motions out of the public eye.........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Defense wants case tossed
By JOHN COTÉ and GARTH STAPLEY
BEE STAFF WRITERS
Last Updated: July 15, 2004, 05:19:11 AM PDT
REDWOOD CITY -- The judge in Scott Peterson's murder trial confirmed Wednesday that the defense is asking that the case be dismissed.
The core of the defense motion appears to be allegations that prosecutors withheld evidence and that a Modesto police detective deliberately misled the jury.
Legal experts described the bid as a long shot, but it remains "a doomsday sanction hanging over the case like a sword" until resolved, one analyst said.
Judge Alfred Delucchi set a July 29 hearing on the issue.
Delucchi also will hear arguments on a second motion by defense attorney Mark Geragos regarding whether the jury will hear Peterson's televised interviews with three news stations in January 2003, about a month after his pregnant wife vanished.
After opposing having the interviews introduced, the defense now wants the jury to see unedited interviews, something at least one network has balked at.
The defense motions have not been made public, but their substance became clear Wednesday morning after media attorneys argued to have the issues decided in open court. Jurors were not present.
Geragos cites precedent
Geragos on Wednesday cited a California Supreme Court case in which a death penalty..........
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
IN THE MEANTIME:
LACI'S HUBBY CHUCKLES AS JURORS WATCH TV INTERVIEW
By HOWARD BREUER
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
July 15, 2004 -- REDWOOD CITY, Calif. — Scott Peterson sat calmly and occasionally chuckled as prosecutors played a videotaped interview with Diane Sawyer in which the suspected wife-killer — apparently wearing the same tan suit — wept on cue over the disappearance of his pregnant wife, Laci.
Prosecutors want to show the video to the jury weighing double-murder charges against Peterson, although the court must first weigh a defense motion to obtain the interview outtakes, which ABC-TV is resisting.
Prosecutors want jurors to hear Peterson's blatant lies to Sawyer, such as his assertion that, when his wife disappeared Dec. 24, 2002, he immediately told police about his affair with Amber Frey.
According to the tapes, Peterson changed his story shortly after the interview, saying he didn't tell police about Amber.
On the tapes, Sawyer is highly skeptical of Peterson's statement that Laci was cool with the affair..........
_-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Detective quizzed on bay searches
Detective quizzed on bay searches
Lee and Jackie Peterson, Scott Peterson's parents, return for the afternoon session on Wednesday at the San Mateo County Superior Courthouse. RON LEWIS/SAN MATEO COUNTY TIMES
By GARTH STAPLEY
and JOHN COTÉ
BEE STAFF WRITERS
Last Updated: July 15, 2004, 05:17:50 AM PDT
REDWOOD CITY -- Multiple law-enforcement agencies using state-of-the-art sonar and dive equipment failed to find Laci Peterson or concrete blocks weighing down her remains in San Francisco Bay despite months of searching, a detective acknowledged Wednesday. That's because there wasn't anything to find, Scott Peterson's attorney seemed to suggest on Day 23 of testimony in his client's double-murder trial.
"The defense's point: (Authorities) have done the most thorough, high-tech search possible and didn't find anything because the bodies weren't dumped there until much later by the real killers," former prosecutor Dean Johnson said.
Mark Geragos, Peterson's lawyer, seemed to take a page out of prosecutor Dave Harris' gamebook in his cross-examination of Modesto police Detective Dodge Hendee: painstaking, tedious questioning without much clarification for jurors.
Aim of searches described........
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Judge weighs whether jurors should see Peterson's TV interviews
Judge weighs whether jurors should see Peterson's TV interviews
Scott Peterson watched himself assert his innocence of murder in an old interview that was played in court Wednesday.
By Harriet Ryan
Court TV
REDWOOD CITY, Calif. — A judge heard Scott Peterson tearfully declare himself innocent of his pregnant wife's murder Wednesday when he reviewed the tape of a television interview prosecutors plan to play for jurors in the fertilizer salesman's double murder trial.
Judge Alfred Delucchi screened two interviews which aired last year on ABC's "Good Morning, America" and "Prime Time Live" to decide whether edited versions are admissible as evidence.
Jurors were not present for the playing of the interviews, nor for several other legal arguments Wednesday morning. Testimony in the case is set to continue in the afternoon when Modesto police detective Henry "Dodge" Hendee returns to the stand.
In the "Good Morning, America" interview, conducted three months before Peterson's arrest, anchorwoman Diane Sawyer questions him about the disappearance of his wife, Laci, and his affair with massage therapist Amber Frey.
Story continues........
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
court doc Modesto PD Interview with Scott
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The trial of Scott Peterson for the murder of his wife Laci and their unborn son, once declared a "slam dunk" by prosecutors, is as uncertain as ever. Court TV anchor and former prosecutor Nancy Grace looks at where the case stands now in a series of LIVE prime time specials.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phone transcripts reveal slight variation in Peterson's account
Phone transcripts reveal slight variation in Peterson's account
The Petersons' dining room table, seen here as murder trial Exhibit 37Q, is the subject of a conversation between Sharon Rocha and Scott Peterson in one of the telephone transcripts released Wednesday.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Court Exibit copy of Scott Peterson and Sharon Rocha conversation
Transcript: People's Exhibit 23A
By JOHN COTÉ
BEE STAFF WRITER
Last Updated: July 15, 2004, 05:18:15 AM PDT
REDWOOD CITY -- Scott Peterson told his mother-in-law he came home, grabbed a piece of pizza and jumped into the shower the day his wife was reported missing, according to a transcript of a February 2003 phone call between the two.
He told a detective in December 2002 that he got home, carried a mop bucket outside, dumped it, put his clothes in the washer, called for his wife, grabbed some pizza and a glass of milk and then took a shower, according to a transcript from that taped interview.
Both transcripts, previously viewed by jurors in Peterson's murder trial and made public Wednesday, highlight subtle variations in his story and give glimpses into his account of the last hours he saw his wife alive.
"She was feeling good, you know, that morning," Peterson told his mother-in-law, Sharon Rocha, as she taped his call for police. "She was, you know, excited to be baking, you know, she was into her gingerbread thing." In the call Rocha pressed Peterson on why he didn't notice when he got home that his wife hadn't been baking or that the lights were off........
_----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Excerpt) Read more at courttv.com ...
Pinging........
Pinging........
Pinging........
(snipped)
Oh yeah, this hilarious! Sick puppy thinks this is funny??
I didn't find humor in this. In fact I thought it was a morbid statement.
It's hard to listen to Nancy Grace, but I did catch a few minutes of her CTV show last night--folks on there seemed to think a mistrial would be the prosecution's best hope. I wonder: is the trial really going that badly? I thought (from what I've read so far) they've done a pretty good job of presenting a case that didn't have a lot of physical evidence--or as good as could be expected anyway.
I am really not sure on the who is better than who side... Only the jurors and the judge knows for sure.
"I wonder: is the trial really going that badly?"
No, I don't think so. The prosection probably could have done a better job but they are getting the evidence out there. Hopefully, they'll have a good closing argument and pull it all together. Geragos, IMO, has an infrastructure for working the media. Perhaps he believes that some of this filters down to jurors. You really need to read transcripts and pick and choose to whom you listen. I find Beth Karas on CTV to be balanced and rational.
IMHO Geragos is running scared. Why else demand a mistrial? Why else his hissy fits? Why else keep distracting the jury when the prosecutor is putting on a display or questioning witnesses? Why else the cheering sections of talking heads telling how great he is -- without explaining what he did so great? And then there are the lies Geragos told.
Geragos acts exactly like a lawyer who knows his client is guilty and there is evidence. He had probably put all his hopes on Juror No. 5, who might be infatuated with Scott or otherswise in his pocket. At the very least No. 5 was prejudiced against pregnant women. I just heard him say how well Scott had treated his wife. I my book a man who runs around and has his wife pawn her jewelry so he can take his mistress out is NOT treating his wife well.
Thanks for the ping, rb!
Time to call in the expert consultant!
Who interviewed SP in his home around that time? Do you remember when he went to the bathroom to "check his tears?" I wonder if they will show that interview.
Snip it:
"On Wednesday, Geragos called Brocchini's testimony an "intentional and willful violation." He has argued that Peterson was framed by someone who knew his widely reported alibi.
The judge deferred a decision on what to do about Brocchini's testimony until July 29. Delucchi has been inclined to discuss such motions in private, but indicated Wednesday the hearing would be open if lawyers could argue their sides without revealing sensitive information that could taint jurors who might -- improperly -- be following the case in the press.
Geragos wants to discredit Brocchini even more by trotting out a 1998 home invasion robbery case in Modesto which Brocchini investigated.
Brocchini's testimony caused a mistrial after a Stanislaus County judge ruled his comments might have prejudiced the jury, according to court documents. Despite the judge's admonitions, Brocchini told jurors he wanted to talk with one defendant about another robbery in which "he may or may not have been involved."
A defense attorney alleged Brocchini intentionally disregarded the judge's directive because prosecutors "felt the case slipping away," according to an opinion from a state appeals court. The court found Brocchini's conduct to be "improper" but didn't conclude he intentionally tried to "trigger a mistrial."
Chances are remote that Judge Delucchi will grant a mistrial or dismiss charges, speculated Jim Hammer, a former prosecutor who regularly attends the Peterson trial.
But Geragos still may damage Brocchini's credibility -- and by association the prosecution's case -- if the judge lets him cross-examine the detective about the 1998 case.
"This would be their Fuhrman," Hammer said, referring to the Los Angeles police officer whose false testimony helped acquit O.J. Simpson on murder charges. "That would be like dropping a bomb on the prosecution."
Dean Johnson, a former San Mateo County prosecutor also watching the trial, said it was more likely the judge would strike some of Brocchini's testimony."......
Gloria Gomez, NBC video feedroom has those! Yes, they will, I believe.
Yes, that was her! Someone had a photo of some sort of him looking back at himself in the mirror. I hope they show that part. Boy, he's a real piece of work, that SOB!
From all what I've read, the prosecutors are calm, while Geragos is often hysterical. Perhaps it is a coverup for incompetence.
If Scott is acquitted it will be in spite of Geragos. OJ jurors would've have acquitted no matter what the evidence.
from 11-12 noon, Nancy Grace can be listen too on this talk radio station.
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.