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

Skip to comments.

Laci's things in tug of war
The Modesto Bee ^ | May 31, 2003 | Garth Stapely and John Cote'

Posted on 05/31/2003 8:41:50 AM PDT by runningbear

Laci's things in tug of war


Laci Peterson's brother Brent Rocha loads a rocking chair from her Modesto home into the back of a truck Friday morning.

Laci's things in tug of war

By GARTH STAPLEY and JOHN COTÉ

BEE STAFF WRITERS

Published: May 31, 2003, 07:16:10 AM PDT

Laci Peterson's family and friends removed truckloads of items from the slain Modesto woman's house on Friday, touching off controversy between her family and that of her husband.

Police responded to the Covena Avenue home at about 10 a.m. after a security company reported that the alarm had been triggered, Capt. Greg Savelli said.

Officers determined that Laci Peterson's family and friends were removing items that belonged to Laci, said Savelli, who added that officers documented what was taken.

"We're treating this as a civil dispute over property," he said. "It was clear to the Police Department that this was not a burglary.

Peterson's husband, Scott, 30, has been charged with double murder and faces the death penalty in the killings of his 27-year-old wife and their unborn son, Conner.

Savelli said the fallout from Friday's property removal "was best handled between the families and their attorneys."

Adam Stewart, an attorney for Laci Peterson's family, said the family had been in contact with Scott Peterson's defense team, who had agreed to allow Laci's mother, Sharon Rocha, to go through the house on Tuesday. She was to be accompanied by representatives of the defense team, and all items taken were to be photographed and videotaped.

Scott Peterson's parents and lawyers expressed outrage that the Rochas did not follow the agreement.

Jackie Peterson said the people who went into the home Friday had "absolutely no permission to be in that house. I have a lot of empathy for Sharon, but she does not have a right to go in our house and take what she wants."

Rocha did not appear to be among the packers. Calls placed to the Rocha home were not accepted.

Seven vehicles loaded

Among the items loaded into seven vehicles were a crib, a rocking chair and a box with Graco printed on the outside. Graco makes such products as strollers, highchairs and car seats.

Laci Peterson's family announced Wednesday that it had hired attorneys to help recover items from the house. A list included her wedding dress, jewelry and Conner's crib.

Jackie Peterson told The Bee that the security company notified her by telephone in San Diego County that the house alarm had been tripped.

The property removal appeared to take Scott Peterson's defense team by surprise.

Matthew Dalton, an attorney with lead defense attorney Mark Geragos' law firm, drove to the house and asked reporters if someone had reported a burglary.

Dalton went to Stewart's Modesto law office Friday morning and dropped off some items requested by the Rocha family, Stewart said.

Monday, the defense team moved other items, including what appeared to be gifts, to the Modesto office of defense co-counsel Kirk McAllister, for transfer to Laci Peterson's family. But the items had not been picked up by Friday morning, McAllister said.

Stewart said in front of the home that it would be "ridiculous" to suggest that the Rochas broke into the home.

"I apologize for it coming down to this," he said. "This is not the way we operate. This is for Laci, for Conner and Laci's family. It is not for the media or Mr. Scott Peterson's defense in any way, shape or form. It's depressing that it's come down to this."

Stanislaus County Chief Deputy District Attorney John Goold said prosecutors had no legal authority over the house.

"It's not a crime scene," Goold said. " This is a civil problem between the Rochas and the Petersons."

The house title is in Laci and Scott Petersons' names, county records show. In such a joint tenancy, when one titleholder dies, the title goes to the other.

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

Incident brings Peterson case close to home
Victim's family moves items from house, raising the issue of ownership.

Incident brings Peterson case close to home
Victim's family moves items from house, raising the issue of ownership.

By Garth Stapley and John Coté
The Modesto Bee

(Published Saturday, May 31, 2003, 4:47 AM)

MODESTO -- Laci Peterson's family and friends removed truckloads of items from the slain Modesto woman's house Friday, touching off controversy between her family and that of her husband.

Police officers were dispatched after a security company notified them that the alarm at the Covena Avenue home had been triggered, Capt. Greg Savelli said.

Officers determined that members of the Rocha family and friends of Laci Peterson were removing items that belonged to the slain woman and documented what was taken, Savelli said.

"We're treating this as a civil dispute over property," he said. "It was clear to the police department that this was not a burglary. It was a dispute over property and was best handled between the families and their attorneys."

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

Judge cites Peterson right to fair trial in denying report access

Judge cites Peterson right to fair trial in denying report access

By JOHN COTÉ
BEE STAFF WRITER

Published: May 31, 2003, 07:16:56 AM PDT

A Stanislaus County judge on Friday ordered that arrest and search warrants remain sealed in the case against Scott Peterson, who is accused of murdering his pregnant wife and unborn son.

Superior Court Judge Al Giro-lami's ruling also ordered the autopsy reports for Laci and Conner to stay sealed.

Thursday, District Attorney James Brazelton reversed his position and asked to have the autopsy reports made public, and the matter is set for hearing June 6.

Brazelton's about-face came after part of the fetus's autopsy report was leaked to the media. Prosecutors said that portion was clearly "skewed in favor of the defense."

Defense attorneys, coroner's officials, police and prosecutors have denied leaking the information.

Friday, in his ruling on all the documents, Girolami said releasing them "might irreparably harm the continued investigation into this criminal matter."

"Despite the fact that the complaint has been issued and a suspect has been arrested, the investigation and search for both incriminating and exonerating evidence in this matter continues," Girolami wrote.

Prosecutors and defense attorneys argued that releasing the documents could impede Peterson's right to a fair trial and damage an ongoing investigation.

Girolami agreed, saying in his ruling that releasing the documents "might result in the evidence being destroyed and witnesses being reluctant to step forward."

A group of newspapers, including The Bee, are seeking to have the documents unsealed.

Right to view reports argued

Charity Kenyon, an attorney representing the newspapers, argued that the public's right to view court documents was fundamental in an open legal system.

Other means exist for ensuring

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

Judge orders Laci Peterson autopsy report sealed

Judge orders Laci Peterson autopsy report sealed

The Modesto Bee

The Associated Press

Published: May 31, 2003, 06:49:17 AM PDT

MODESTO, Calif. (AP) - A judge ruled Friday that an autopsy report on the deaths of Laci Peterson and her unborn son should remain sealed along with other search warrant and arrest records.

Superior Court Judge Al Girolami said releasing the information could hamper the murder investigation and prejudice public opinion before a trial begins.

Girolami is scheduled to hear more arguments June 6 from prosecutors preparing a murder case against Peterson's husband, Scott Peterson. Prosecutors on Thursday asked that the autopsy reports be released to the public. They argued that media leaks of the reports are biased toward the defense.

Girolami also ordered that leaks of sealed information stop and indicated he would consider a gag order to stop the prosecution and defense teams from talking to the media.

Scott Peterson, 30, is accused of killing his wife and unborn son, whom the couple had planned to name Conner, last December in their home. Laci, 27, was eight months pregnant at the time. The bodies washed ashore in San Francisco Bay last month.

Contra Costa County authorities concluded their autopsy report earlier this month, but did not disclose the cause of death.

Several media outlets have released details of the coroner's report, and a spokeswoman for Laci Peterson's family members said Thursday they were "devastated" at hearing autopsy reports without warning on television.

The leaked reports indicated the unborn son had plastic tape wrapped around his neck and a significant cut across the shoulders.

Meanwhile, friends of Laci Peterson removed several personal articles Friday from the single-story Modesto home where she and Scott Peterson lived.

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

MOM'S MOVING MOMENT

MOM'S MOVING MOMENT

By HOWARD BREUER and MARSHA KRANES

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

May 31, 2003 -- Laci Peterson's mother - shattered by the graphic details leaked from the 25-page autopsy of her unborn grandson - yesterday began removing her slain daughter's belongings from the home she had shared with her accused murderer husband, Scott.

Sharon Rocha, accompanied by several friends and relatives, was seen at the Modesto, Calif., house removing the rocking chair Laci had bought to use when she nursed her infant son, as well as unopened Christmas gifts, clothing, chairs, lamps and artwork.

In doing so, she ignored the advice of her lawyer, Al Clark, that she wait until he, Scott Peterson's lawyers and court officials work out the procedures to be followed when she entered the house.

Modesto police arrived while Rocha was there, and she and her entourage left a short time later after packing seven cars full of Laci's belongings.

Hours later, lawyers representing Laci's family and Scott Peterson started haggling over whether removing the items was legal.

Scott Peterson's mother, Jackie, expressed outrage that the items had been removed since Laci's family had "absolutely no permission to be in that house."

Scott Peterson has pleaded not guilty to killing his wife and their unborn son.

Laci's family said Wednesday that they had hired lawyers to help them retrieve a baby crib and jewelry from the home.

Meanwhile, Clark told Fox News his client's anger over the grisly revelations leaked from her daughter's and grandson's sealed autopsy reports drove her to go get her daughter's possessions.

A family spokeswoman said Rocha was "devastated" by the reports describing how the near full-term fetus of her grandson Conner had plastic tape wrapped around the neck and a large cut across the chest when he was found in the shallow waters of San Francisco Bay last month.

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

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


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Extended News; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: California
KEYWORDS: avoidingchildsupport; baby; babyunborn; conner; deathpenaltytime; dontubelievemyalibi; getarope; ibefishing; laci; lacipeterson; smallbaby; smallchild; sonkiller; unborn; wifekiller
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 651-700701-750751-800 ... 851-894 next last
To: cinFLA
Duck! Duck! You are either Jesus Christ or you are scum (by your definition).

Actually that is pretty much a Biblcal definition.

701 posted on 06/01/2003 1:12:16 PM PDT by itsahoot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 549 | View Replies]

To: oceanperch
I've been doing estate work for 17 years OP!! Yes, in a lot of cases it does bring out the worst in families. However, that said, I EXCLUDE this situation. The Rocha's have tried to do things on the up and up for months. They are not dealing with honest people. Their actions on Friday last, were done out of desperation and I don't think your going to find any Court or LE that will find otherwise.
702 posted on 06/01/2003 1:12:53 PM PDT by Canadian Outrage (All us Western Canuks belong South)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 697 | View Replies]

To: Sandylapper
You just wait until it is time to have a funeral service for the remains of Connor and Laci. Betcha that the Petersons get into the act and make demands how things will be handled. It will be a bloodbath! Now we know how Scaught came to be a murderer.
703 posted on 06/01/2003 1:16:52 PM PDT by Toespi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 700 | View Replies]

To: MaggieMay
"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....I called Sharon..she said,"I've got to do something".

You're right. After Sharon was on Greta's show, the District Attorney called her that very night and told her she could go in the next Tuesday; Geragos is the one who said no; and he said that when they went in, he was going with them (to watch them suffere, no doubt) and that he intended to VIDEOTAPE them the entire time they were in the house.

During this same period of time is when Geragos leaked the autopsy report; when Al Clark called Sharon and told her he wasn't going to let them go in, that's when she decided to go ahead and go in.

Don't forget that Al Clark said that the Petersons, contrary to what Jackie was saying, had stopped talking to the Rochas, and Sharon was reduced to having to email Jackie. This had been going on for months, and it had been being negotiated for over a month after the Rochas hired their attorneys; Al Clark himself said that his letters to Geragos went unanswered.

And I got the distinct impression that when the Petersons got that list of 22 items that the Rochas wanted, they took TWO lamps and 3 tiny Christmas presents (out of all that stuff) over to Geragos' office and told them to go over there and pick them up. They were ONLY delivered to Al Clark's office AFTER Sharon went on TV and after the DA told her she could go in.

704 posted on 06/01/2003 1:19:48 PM PDT by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 659 | View Replies]

To: daylate-dollarshort
Are you saying that a "gift" to someone should be scooped back by the giver upon the death of the recipient?? A gift is a gift is a gift!!
705 posted on 06/01/2003 1:22:34 PM PDT by Canadian Outrage (All us Western Canuks belong South)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 690 | View Replies]

To: RGSpincich
Spincach you really don't get it, do you.

This means nothing. First it was updated on the 29th a day after the Greta program and it verifies that a deal had been reached with Rocha and her attorneys.

Where is your source that Geragos had secretly limited what Rocha to three items?.

Suggest you try searching Rochas attorneys statement of Thursday morning May 29th. You will find that on Thursday morning he announced that he had receive an angry call from Geragos that the the agreement was off. He further stated to the press that he (Rochas attorney) "thought they had an agreement".

706 posted on 06/01/2003 1:22:39 PM PDT by daylate-dollarshort (http://www.strato.net/~cmranch)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 694 | View Replies]

To: Velveeta
When Sharon Rocha went on Greta's show there was NO date set for her to go into that house; the DA called her or her attorney that very night and told her she could go in Tuesday, June 3rd. When Geragos' found out about that, he called Clark's office and said, "Nobody's going in until I say."

BTW, the other attorney for the Rochas' is on Fox right this minute; he said there was NEVER a deal.......EVER.
707 posted on 06/01/2003 1:22:42 PM PDT by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 660 | View Replies]

To: RGSpincich
Mark Geragos NEVER called and said they could go in; after Greta's show, the district attorney himself called them and told them they could go in on Tuesday, June 3rd.

When Geragos heard that, he called their attorney and said they couldn't go in. That's when Sharon went in.

And they did, IN FACT, take two lamps and 3 presents over to Geragos' office; that is ALL they said she could have. They said she had to come to Geragos' office to pick them up. They had had the list for over a month.

708 posted on 06/01/2003 1:27:19 PM PDT by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 694 | View Replies]

To: MaggieMay
They was NEVER an agreement between Gergaos and the Rochas; never.

The person who told Sharon she could go in the house was the DA.
709 posted on 06/01/2003 1:29:27 PM PDT by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 691 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
That is what I understood the Rocha's attorney to say when he phoned into LKL on Friday night!!
710 posted on 06/01/2003 1:31:34 PM PDT by Canadian Outrage (All us Western Canuks belong South)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 707 | View Replies]

To: Canadian Outrage
That is almost word for word what he said; and he said it again the next day, the day of the "raid."

And he said that the DA called them AFTER the Greta show; he did NOT say Mark Geragos EVER called them saying they could go in.
711 posted on 06/01/2003 1:33:30 PM PDT by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 710 | View Replies]

To: daylate-dollarshort
If they are so rare then why are you able to come up with a long list of teenagers who participated in Satanic killings? Why? Because there are no standards applied ... Rense (an abomination to turn to as a srouce) , nor any of the others sources appears to check whether the killings are teenagers who say that are killing in the name of satan or whether any of these people are members of a true satanic group or coven.

Just a quick glane through the ones I could readily pull up were the teenage type who said they murdered for Satan.

712 posted on 06/01/2003 1:33:36 PM PDT by BunnySlippers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 642 | View Replies]

To: Canadian Outrage
It was a gift to Laci from Scott. Upon Laci's death it returned to Scott's ownership.

Are you trying to say it was a gift to Laci's Family????????

Sheeese....
713 posted on 06/01/2003 1:33:41 PM PDT by daylate-dollarshort (http://www.strato.net/~cmranch)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 705 | View Replies]

To: daylate-dollarshort
Suggest you try searching Rochas attorneys statement of Thursday morning May 29th. You will find that on Thursday morning he announced that he had receive an angry call from Geragos that the the agreement was off. He further stated to the press that he (Rochas attorney) "thought they had an agreement".

That's your claim; you post the statement.

714 posted on 06/01/2003 1:37:32 PM PDT by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 706 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
I know, it's abundantly clear, that all attempts by the Rocha's to retrieve their deceased daughter's personal things were met by nothing but headbutts. The Defense has NO legs to stand on and I think even Geragos would be afraid to go after the Rochas's. It's an argument that is NOT going to fly and will in fact backfire. That rediculous little twit that Geragos sent over the Covena house was a good example of what the Rocha's have had to deal with.
715 posted on 06/01/2003 1:38:01 PM PDT by Canadian Outrage (All us Western Canuks belong South)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 711 | View Replies]

To: daylate-dollarshort
First it was updated on the 29th a day after the Greta program and it verifies that a deal had been reached with Rocha and her attorneys.

Yeah I know, if it had been last updated the day before...you would have been right. But it wasn't and you're not.

Where is your source that Geragos had secretly limited what Rocha to three items?

It's no secret.

I showed you the statement. You need to come across with a little proof of what you contend. Source that an agreement (as misleading as it originally was) was made between the Rochas and the defense prior to the show.

While your at it, tell us again how the no response faxes proves that they are in negotiations. You never did explain that one.

716 posted on 06/01/2003 1:39:26 PM PDT by RGSpincich
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 706 | View Replies]

To: Canadian Outrage
Then legally should not the Rochas have gone through the legal system to get these items?

I saw footage of them taking rattaan chairs. That is that important? Sorry I do not understand.

I can understand wanting her diplomas and very personal items but they carted off it looked like what they could.

In my opinion they looted the Peterson home. No matter how uncoopertive the Petersons were it does not give Rochas' the right to load up seven rigs with household items.

I am dissapointed that MPD did not put and end to it. The court should seal the house off to all involved and go through probate like the rest of America would be required to.

If I allowed my emotions to get in the way and took back things from someone I would be in a jail cell.

I really do feel for the Rochas loss but crossing the line is not acceptable civil behaviour.
717 posted on 06/01/2003 1:39:32 PM PDT by oceanperch (Who needs Hollywood Productions when you have Fox Reality TV?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 702 | View Replies]

To: daylate-dollarshort
Good Gawd!! *groan* there's no point!!
718 posted on 06/01/2003 1:41:51 PM PDT by Canadian Outrage (All us Western Canuks belong South)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 713 | View Replies]

To: TheSpottedOwl
This jewelry issue is the most interesting little item. First of all, Scott and Laci weren't married very long and doing the combine or alter or whatever to Laci's wedding ring and the grandmothers is a little early in their life together. What's missing is: Laci MUST have discussed this with her mother or best friend. It is one of those things you "tell" to someone else. It's not a "secret" thing. It's a feeling thing that involves others.

In the end, Laci died without her wedding ring(s) on...

Now all we need is the "time" when the rings went to the jeweler and and to know why Scott didn't pick them up in the months to follow. I think the jeweler may play an important part in this case.

719 posted on 06/01/2003 1:49:49 PM PDT by Sacajaweau (God Bless Our Troops!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 664 | View Replies]

To: oceanperch
Are you saying that Peterson's have rights and the Rocha's have none? Laci is still on title as a joint owner. There has been no probate and no death certificate. The chair was a rocking chair that Laci has bought to rock the baby when she brought him home. Frankly, this situation is not the norm. The Peterson's have done as they pleased. They have shown not ONE bit of DECENCY in this situation. The Rochas's ASKED many times for 22 things that were Laci's. IMO they shouldn't have had to ask twice!! When it comes to the FINAL disposition of the entire property, yes, that will be a Court proceeding. A bloody Power of Attorney does NOT give the Peterson's ownership rights. Besides, NONE of us know whether Laci had a Will in which she stipulated certain items to given as bequests to certain memebers of her family or his for that matter. I think we should all STOP this stupid conversation because NONE of us know the nitty gritty details. However, it's clear to me that Snott Peterson is a very greedy person and after viewing the actions of his mother and father, I can see why.
720 posted on 06/01/2003 1:50:29 PM PDT by Canadian Outrage (All us Western Canuks belong South)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 717 | View Replies]

To: oceanperch
The wicker chairs were given to Laci in a will from her grandmother.
721 posted on 06/01/2003 1:56:50 PM PDT by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 717 | View Replies]

To: RGSpincich
Laci Peterson (news - web sites)'s mother won permission yesterday from her former in-laws to visit her daughter's house, sit in the chair Laci bought to rock baby Conner and feel the presence of her dead daughter.

Complete coverage of the World Trade Center disaster from New York's Hometown Newspaper!
Complete news, sports & entertainment coverage from New York City's No. 1 newspaper!

 

When she leaves, Sharon Rocha will take with her dozens of her daughter's possessions, including her wedding dress.

Rocha got the go-ahead after weeks of bitter fighting with her daughter's former in-laws over access to the Modesto, Calif., house that Laci shared with her husband until she disappeared around Christmas Eve, according to lawyers for the Rocha family.

"Sharon was notified last night by the [Stanislaus County district attorney's] office that she can go in on Tuesday," lawyer Albert Clark told the Daily News.

The family wanted several of Laci's personal items, including jewelry, her journals, the crib, a glass memento box containing sea shells and a set of salt and pepper shakers shaped like snails, Clark said.

"More importantly to Laci's family," a statement from the Rochas' lawyers said, "is the opportunity to be inside Laci's home. ... They need to have the freedom and opportunity to sit in her chair that she used to sit in, to walk on the floor that she used to walk on, to sit in Conner's room in the rocking chair Laci had purchased to rock him in, and just to have the opportunity to feel her presence."

Jackie Peterson, Scott Peterson (news - web sites)'s mother, said she had tried to call the Rochas but they wouldn't return her phone calls.

She also said she had been inside the house recently, but only to "keep it clean." Originally published on May 30, 2003

722 posted on 06/01/2003 2:00:28 PM PDT by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 716 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
If given to her by a will, the chair is Laci's and Laci's alone.
723 posted on 06/01/2003 2:06:15 PM PDT by Sacajaweau (God Bless Our Troops!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 721 | View Replies]

To: MaggieMay
Rochas' speak up on Greta. They are ticked whose to say that they are not giving partial truths. Trying to play the Petersons game.

Just because Sharan Rocha says it does not mean it the actual going on behind the scene.

We are not supposed to do things according to our mental state on avoidance of the law. Or so I have been told.
724 posted on 06/01/2003 2:07:15 PM PDT by oceanperch (Who needs Hollywood Productions when you have Fox Reality TV?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 678 | View Replies]

To: Sacajaweau
Exactly.

As were the Tiffany lamps and the diamond ring.
725 posted on 06/01/2003 2:07:37 PM PDT by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 723 | View Replies]

To: MaggieMay
At the risk of being redundant, I just want it on record that there was NO deal. The DA was the one who told Sharon she could go in on Tuesady, NOT Geragos.
726 posted on 06/01/2003 2:09:34 PM PDT by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 678 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
Now it makes more sense, thanks.
727 posted on 06/01/2003 2:15:48 PM PDT by RGSpincich
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 708 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
I think you will find the same for "gifts" which were given to Laci. They revert to the giver, not her husband. My girlfriend went through one "nasty" circumstance. Certain "gifts" from her family she was able to retain including a $7000 China Cabinet (family heirloom). The Judge ruled that it was intended to stay in her family and her's alone. Her duaghter now has it.
728 posted on 06/01/2003 2:17:41 PM PDT by Sacajaweau (God Bless Our Troops!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 725 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
That's exactly what we needed! Good catch.
729 posted on 06/01/2003 2:17:42 PM PDT by RGSpincich
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 722 | View Replies]

To: RGSpincich
I knew I heard him say it on TV; I just wanted to find it in writing.

He NEVER said that there was an agreement. Ever.
730 posted on 06/01/2003 2:20:30 PM PDT by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 729 | View Replies]

To: Canadian Outrage
Your right we do not know. I was talking about the two rataan chairs.

You say you have been in Probate for 17yrs. Regardless of how bad the behaviour of one side over the other isn't the bottom line that all involved follow court probate.

How would your firm deal with client A doing what the Rocha's did? Is that not why we have a probate to keep things civil.

No I am not saying power of of Attn. gave Petersons any rights to property.

This should been addressed by the courts if the two families were going to feud. Right or wrongly feuding.

Laci's tragic murder does not entitle her family to do things out of legal juristiction. It would have been wonderful for Jackie/Scaught Peterson to say we agree take what you feel will give you comfort but they didn't and it stinks. They are bad charactors and heartless but it still does not give the other side to disobey the State of California's probate system.
731 posted on 06/01/2003 2:21:21 PM PDT by oceanperch (Who needs Hollywood Productions when you have Fox Reality TV?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 720 | View Replies]

To: BunnySlippers
Just a quick glane through the ones I could readily pull up were the teenage type who said they murdered for Satan.

Let's see. There were murders committed; The murderers claimed they were committed in the name and/or for Satan; The murderers certainly believe in and have some sort of allegience to Satan.

I kinda believe that they can be called Satanists.

What is your point? Teenagers cannot be Satanists??? Maybe their claims were somehow just poor jokes??? I wonder if the people they killed in the name of-- or for Satan would agree with you?

I suggest you research the Modesto Bee's reporting of the Satanic murders which occurred about 6 miles north of Modesto. It wasn't one or two, it wasn't even a group of four as the Satanic murder in San Louis Obispo was. It was a named group with many members. Two were charged with the actual killing and several more were charged with conspiracy to murder.

As I posted before, I recognize the quality of the Rense site. I didn't accept Rense as a source, I went directly to the publications and verified the published information for myself.

"If they are so rare then why are you able to come up with a long list of teenagers who participated in Satanic killings? Why? Because there are no standards applied ..."

First I didn't say they were rare. I said Dr. Lee said that he has seen them and characterized them as rare. I don't have any idea how common they are and neither do you. I do know that in a relatively short time, I was able to verify reports of a couple of dozen Satanic killings in the US alone, and so far even more outside of this country. Based upon what I found, I would have to say Brazil is probably the leader in Satanic killings.

What standards do you suggest are applied? If the murderer states that the reason he butchered someone was for Satan or in the name of Satan, just who the hell are we to say nope, doesn't meet the standard? That he dressed up Hollywood horror movie style? Maybe it's only a Satanic killing if if a pipe organ is playing a funeral dirge in the background?

What's wrong with the standard that the murderer him or her self place on the act---"I DID IT FOR SATAN!" "I DID IT IN THE NAME OF SATAN!!"

You seem to indicate that you believe that all of these reports only involve teenagers. That is untrue. I have found descriptions of Satanic killings committed by 40 year olds, 50 year olds even one case where the perpetrator was in his 70's. Most are committed by younger people BECAUSE THEY GET CAUGHT and taken out of circulation.

Where is it written that a Satanic killing has to be done by a group? If so, how big does the group have to be, in your opinion? Maybe the group has to be able to fill the Crystal Cathedral!?

An individual cannot be a Satanist??

732 posted on 06/01/2003 2:30:15 PM PDT by daylate-dollarshort (http://www.strato.net/~cmranch)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 712 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
It still should have been decided in probate. Like I told Canadian O it would of been great for Scott to give permission to allow them to go in and take what would comfort them but he said no. I then would go to probate.

Maybe I will start getting emotional about the retirees in my community and when they pass on just go in and take a few items I cherish. Who cares about following probate laws.

The Petersons are cruel greedy people and they IMO should have to wait for probate too.

The house should have been sealed off a long time ago from all parties.

Now maybe others will follow suit in California. Hey the Rocha's did it with no recourse..Can you imagine the fueds that would set off and may even involve uncivility with heated tempers and someone getting killed.

I am no fan of courts and the costs and do not plan on dying soon but my family has a notarized will for each of us and paid an attn to make it all legal it did not cost a fortune to do the consequenses if we didn't would be a mess.
733 posted on 06/01/2003 2:34:29 PM PDT by oceanperch (Who needs Hollywood Productions when you have Fox Reality TV?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 721 | View Replies]

To: oceanperch
I'm sorry; if they went to probate, there would be nothing left. The Petersons were already moving stuff out of that house.
734 posted on 06/01/2003 2:37:42 PM PDT by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 733 | View Replies]

To: oceanperch
I agree that the ESTATE should be dealt with by Court Probate. However, I know that ALL of the Wills we prepare, have a clause in them in which the person may make specific bequests to certain people OR they make reference to specific bequests of items to be disbursed as set out as "contained in a list attached to this my Last Will and Testament". If the Peterson's were normal people, NONE of this would have happened. They would have been more than willing to let Sharon go into the house, grieve in her own way, and then take specific items of Laci's that were important to Laci and now important to her mom. I didn't say it was strictly legally right but I notice that Geragos is smart enough to now say that nothing will come of it. The DIFFERENCE in these two families has been Stark. The Rocha's are in no way deceitful, greedy or criminal people. To have to haggle to get a few things of your dead daughter's is criminal to me.
735 posted on 06/01/2003 2:37:55 PM PDT by Canadian Outrage (All us Western Canuks belong South)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 731 | View Replies]

To: daylate-dollarshort
I have a statement and question: Firstly, we ALL know that there are plenty of Satanic Murders, however, No Satanic group goes to the pains that the murderer of Laci did, to hide the evidence. They kill, have their ceremony and usually leave the evidence in the woods at the place of their sick ceremony. Secondly, Could you possibly be a plant here from Geragos? You are one of the most contrary on this board to date. It is anything but edifying.
736 posted on 06/01/2003 2:44:36 PM PDT by Canadian Outrage (All us Western Canuks belong South)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 732 | View Replies]

To: daylate-dollarshort
I kinda believe that they can be called Satanists.

Well, we disagree then. If some kids playing dungeons and dragons say they killed in the name of satan are not Satanists in my mind. They are punks who are doing random killings (which may have been what happened to Laci).

What is your point? Teenagers cannot be Satanists??? Maybe their claims were somehow just poor jokes??? I wonder if the people they killed in the name of-- or for Satan would agree with you?

Funny you should put it that way. I see "Satanic killings" being like making a subgroup for so-called "hate crimes". People may have been murdered at random or to satisfy some punk's need to "know how it feels" but "Satanic"? I don't think so. Murder is murder.

As I posted before, I recognize the quality of the Rense site. I didn't accept Rense as a source, I went directly to the publications and verified the published information for myself.

You posted Rense word for word.

Bottom line, I'm just not willing to think that people who claim to be Satanic killers are indeed what they say they are. I would be impressed if you were able to pinpoint some covens or Satanic groups who actually DO Satanic killings ... not copy from a psychic phenomenon site.

737 posted on 06/01/2003 2:46:44 PM PDT by BunnySlippers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 732 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
Howlin - have you EVER seen a Peterson shed a tear since this tragic event? EVER? I haven't! Their talk is real cheap but their actions and lack of same, speak volumes.
738 posted on 06/01/2003 2:53:30 PM PDT by Canadian Outrage (All us Western Canuks belong South)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 734 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
I heard the Rocha's attorney make that statement. The reporter specifically asked him about the Tuesday time when the Rochas were to go into Laci's house. The attorney said there was no Tuesday deal....."the furtherest thing from the truth". (his exact words)
739 posted on 06/01/2003 3:21:28 PM PDT by Carolinamom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 707 | View Replies]

To: oceanperch
Rochas' speak up on Greta. They are ticked whose to say that they are not giving partial truths. Trying to play the Petersons game.

You may not agree with them or think that people should be free to donate towards paying their bills, but that's no reason to say they might be lying. At least they are not asking the taxpayers to support them because of a disability.

740 posted on 06/01/2003 3:32:58 PM PDT by RGSpincich
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 724 | View Replies]

To: itsahoot
That is most of what I say, don't have money to make the payments, it isn't a long time before foreclosure takes place.... Yep, I know the steps..>Not that has happened to me, happened to others I know/knew..... Thanks...
741 posted on 06/01/2003 3:33:04 PM PDT by runningbear (Lurkers beware, Freeping is public opinions based on facts, theories, and news online.......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 698 | View Replies]

To: runningbear
What with Lawyers and mortgage payments, mommy and daddy Peterson just might go broke.!! They WANT this house to sell to help with legal costs. No doubt in my mind anyway. I think that's one reason they will make the payments for awhile anyway. We'll have to see what a Court Probate does. They just may NOT get as much as they think. It's also very possible that Snott will not collect Life Insurance.
742 posted on 06/01/2003 3:45:28 PM PDT by Canadian Outrage (All us Western Canuks belong South)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 741 | View Replies]

To: RGSpincich
Who is asking the Govt to support them due to a disability? The Petersons'?

I still stand by my opinion that is shaped by what I hear on the news since that is my source. For what ever that is worth it is still mine to have.

743 posted on 06/01/2003 3:55:41 PM PDT by oceanperch (Who needs Hollywood Productions when you have Fox Reality TV?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 740 | View Replies]

To: RGSpincich
BTW Rocha's own Attn. said three hours ago on Fox that Sharon was not telling the truth. That is where my opinion came from.
744 posted on 06/01/2003 3:58:57 PM PDT by oceanperch (Who needs Hollywood Productions when you have Fox Reality TV?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 740 | View Replies]

To: Canadian Outrage
can you imagine those payments on top of the Peterson's other financial obligations? That house payment on Covena must be near 1400 a month? And not to say, any vehicle payments, plus that impound truck payments.... Unless Scott can declare BK... His and Laci's credit is going down the tubes unless as you say, the parents are paying to keep up with it all... Wealth!
745 posted on 06/01/2003 4:01:58 PM PDT by runningbear (Lurkers beware, Freeping is public opinions based on facts, theories, and news online.......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 742 | View Replies]

To: runningbear
I thought they had Ins. to continue to pay the mortgage. Isn't that covered on their homeowners policy?
746 posted on 06/01/2003 4:05:28 PM PDT by oceanperch (Who needs Hollywood Productions when you have Fox Reality TV?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 745 | View Replies]

To: runningbear
whoops, I just noticed the time, I gotta go get something done around here and do some cooking. LOL BBL
747 posted on 06/01/2003 4:10:06 PM PDT by Canadian Outrage (All us Western Canuks belong South)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 745 | View Replies]

To: Sacajaweau
This jewelry issue is the most interesting little item. First of all, Scott and Laci weren't married very long and doing the combine or alter or whatever to Laci's wedding ring and the grandmothers is a little early in their life together. What's missing is: Laci MUST have discussed this with her mother or best friend. It is one of those things you "tell" to someone else. It's not a "secret" thing. It's a feeling thing that involves others.

Good point. My dad had my mom's diamond solitare reset for their 30th anniversary. Laci and Scott were married for approximately 5 yrs. I'm sure that Laci would have mentioned this being done, especially since the extra stones would involve "family" jewelry.

Now all we need is the "time" when the rings went to the jeweler and and to know why Scott didn't pick them up in the months to follow. I think the jeweler may play an important part in this case.

It's not logical for both rings to be used for a reset, imo. You'd still want your wedding band separate from the solitare, wouldn't you? If Laci was experiencing water retention from pregnancy, that would explain why she wasn't wearing them. Maybe Scott didn't take the stuff to the jeweler's. Why would he take every bit of jewelry to the store to have it all made into one ring? Well I don't want to say who's name popped up as needing the cash, because that's just pure speculation ;-)

I think the jeweler will be a witness for the prosecution, and that's why we won't hear anything about this until the information is available to the public. Three choices: Scott did plan on having a ring remade for Laci, he intended to have the ring made for someone else, or the stuff was going to be hocked.

748 posted on 06/01/2003 4:18:01 PM PDT by TheSpottedOwl (America...love it or leave it. Canada is due north-Mexico is directly south...start walking.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 719 | View Replies]

To: Canadian Outrage
I think we should all STOP this stupid conversation because NONE of us know the nitty gritty details. However, it's clear to me that Snott Peterson is a very greedy person and after viewing the actions of his mother and father, I can see why.

Any decent person would have offered to let the Rochas come and get these things, without them having to resort to raiding the house.

749 posted on 06/01/2003 4:21:43 PM PDT by TheSpottedOwl (America...love it or leave it. Canada is due north-Mexico is directly south...start walking.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 720 | View Replies]

To: TheSpottedOwl
I agree and with an open heart.

The Petersons maybe in denial over the son but if they truly loved Laci as their own they should have gave the Rochas' their blessing on retreiving personal items as soon as possible.

All the smoke and mirrors MG is putting out is not going to work if the client and his parents show a side of greed and cold heartedness. Not exactly a sympathy factor. It will add to the doubt SP has casted with his actions from day one.
750 posted on 06/01/2003 4:29:34 PM PDT by oceanperch (Who needs Hollywood Productions when you have Fox Reality TV?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 749 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 651-700701-750751-800 ... 851-894 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