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

Skip to comments.

Taped Peterson calls heard
The Modesto Bee ^ | July 30, 2003 | John Cote'

Posted on 07/30/2003 5:46:56 AM PDT by runningbear

Taped Peterson calls heard

Taped Peterson calls heard

By JOHN COTÉ
BEE STAFF WRITER

Published: July 30, 2003, 05:28:12 AM PDT

About 30 journalists had listened as of Tuesday to their tapped phone calls to Scott Peterson, according to prosecutors who are making the recordings available under a court order.

The Stanislaus County district attorney's office set up appointments with journalists starting Monday, and four members of The Bee staff went in on the second day to listen to their calls, all made to Peterson's cellular phone.

According to documents on file in Superior Court, law enforcement captured hundreds of calls during two wiretapping operations amid the investigation into the disappearance and death of Peterson's pregnant wife, Laci.

Peterson told police that his wife was missing when he returned to their Modesto home on Christmas Eve after a daylong fishing trip to San Francisco Bay.

Her body and that of the couple's unborn son, Conner, were found in mid-April along the bay's eastern shore, within four miles of where Peterson said he launched his 14-foot aluminum boat.

Peterson is being held without bail in county jail, charged with two counts of murder in the slayings, and could receive the death penalty if convicted.

The district attorney's office, as required by law, notified journalists and others whose calls had been intercepted. According to the notices, one wiretap ran from Jan. 10 to Feb. 4, and the other from April 15 to April 18.

Peterson was arrested April 18, within a week after the bodies were recovered.

Many of the journalists caught in the wiretap operations sought to keep the calls from being shared with the prosecution and defense, arguing that they were privileged communications protected by state and federal law.

Superior Court Judge Al Giro-lami disagreed, but allowed the wiretapped parties to listen to their individual calls.

Neither prosecution nor defense attorneys objected to reporters listening to their own calls.

Lead defense counsel Mark Geragos characterized the calls as "embarrassing" to journalists. "I listened to as many of the media calls as I could stomach," he said during a July 9 court hearing.

Roughly 60 journalists had arranged as of Tuesday to listen to their calls, Chief Deputy District Attorney John Goold said. Time slots run through Thursday afternoon.

He declined to say how many notices had been sent out in connection with the wiretaps, which captured calls between Peterson and a woman whom he had an affair with, his attorney, family members and others.

Tuesday, reporters sat in a small office at the district attorney's office to listen to the calls, in digital format, played on a computer.

Some reporters heard themselves leave voice mail messages, and then heard those messages again as someone -- apparently Peterson -- played them, sometimes all the way through, other times deleting them before hearing the call-back numbers, some Bee reporters said.

Peterson appeared to listen to an entire message on Feb. 3 seeking comment before The Bee ran an article about Peterson's having traded in his wife's Land Rover as part of his purchase of a 2002 Dodge pickup.

He apparently picked up the message about two minutes after reporter Patrick Giblin left it.

"You could hear background noise," Giblin said. "It was noisy, and you ......

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

University of San Francisco Moot Court to Consider Kobe Bryant Case; Students to Argue Appropriate Punishment, Should NBA Star be Found Guilty

Mon Jul 28 08:37:22 2003 Pacific Time

ADVISORY for Fri., Aug 1, 10 a.m.

University of San Francisco Moot Court to Consider Kobe Bryant Case; Students to Argue Appropriate Punishment, Should NBA Star be Found Guilty

SAN FRANCISCO, July 28 (AScribe Newswire) -- If National Basketball Association star Kobe Bryant is found guilty of felony sexual assault, what should his punishment be? That's the question facing law students at the University of San Francisco on Friday, Aug. 1 as they hold a moot court to consider theories of punishment in the high-profile case.

The moot court will begin at 10 a.m. in the Moot Court Room, University of San Francisco School of Law, Kendrick Hall, 2199 Fulton Street located at the corner of Fulton and Shrader streets.

"The goal is to challenge the students with the same question that will challenge a court," said Robert Talbot, USF professor of law. "The Bryant case is unusual in many ways. One of the extremely difficult questions a court will have to face if Bryant is found guilty is what should the punishment be in such a highly visible case where there is no prior history of wrongdoing."

Talbot said sentencing in criminal cases is based on various theories of punishment such as retribution, deterrence, incapacitation, and rehabilitation. Each of these theories of punishment might call for a different sentence in a particular case. In the Bryant case, if he is found guilty, Bryant's punishment could range from probation to life in prison. USF law students will deliver arguments for the prosecution and the defense as to what theory of punishment should apply and what an appropriate sentence should be if Bryant is actually found guilty.

The exercise is the culmination of a four-day intensive course in criminal law and moot court. It is also part of what has become a special criminal law series at the university. For the past six years, Talbot has chosen high-profile cases to mix in with fictitious cases to challenge the new students in moot court.

"I try to present a series of problems that will test their arguing skills," Talbot said. "It ......

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


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Extended News; Government; News/Current Events; US: California
KEYWORDS: avoidingchildsupport; baby; babyunborn; conner; deathpenaltytime; dontubelievemyalibi; getarope; ibefishing; laci; lacipeterson; smallbaby; smallchild; sonkiller; unborn; wifekiller
just the latest news on Peterson case....
1 posted on 07/30/2003 5:46:56 AM PDT by runningbear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Rheo; Mystery Y; Searching4Justice; brneyedgirl; Scupoli; sissyjane; TexKat; Lanza; Mrs.Liberty; ...
Pinging.....
2 posted on 07/30/2003 5:47:41 AM PDT by runningbear (Lurkers beware, Freeping is public opinions based on facts, theories, and news online.......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: vikingchick; Rheo; Mystery Y; Searching4Justice; brneyedgirl; Texas Eagle; Scupoli; Lanza; ...
Pinging.....
3 posted on 07/30/2003 5:48:10 AM PDT by runningbear (Lurkers beware, Freeping is public opinions based on facts, theories, and news online.......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
Law now is life insurance policies can't be in secret
Legislation signed by Davis arose from the death of Laci Peterson and her unborn son

Article Last Updated: Wednesday, July 30, 2003 - 5:33:24 AM PST

Law now is life insurance policies can't be in secret
Legislation signed by Davis arose from the death of Laci Peterson and her unborn son

By Amber Prochaska, STAFF WRITER

Gov. Gray Davis has signed legislation that obligates insurance companies to inform clients if either spouse could financially gain from the death of the other. "This is just one more thing we have to notify people about. Frankly, I'm not in favor," said insurance broker Pat Tuohy of San Ramon Insurance Agency.

"This is the kind of legislation that there is no pressing demand for. I do not think there are a bunch of husbands and wives out there secretly buying life insurance -- it is highly unlikely."

Officials said the legislation stems from the death of Modesto resident Laci Peterson.

Prior to her death, her husband Scott Peterson took out a$250,000 policy on her life. Scott Peterson was arrested on suspicion of murder in connections with the deaths of his wife and their unborn son, and has pleaded innocent to the charges.

"This bill would give married couples the assurance that no financial gains are hidden from spouses," Gov. Davis said.

The legislation, introduced as Assembly Bill 1083, prohibits an insurer from issuing life insurance with a face value of $50,000 or more unless the spouse has been notified or has signed the application.........

4 posted on 07/30/2003 5:51:15 AM PDT by runningbear (Lurkers beware, Freeping is public opinions based on facts, theories, and news online.......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: runningbear
Gov. Gray Davis has signed legislation that obligates insurance companies to inform clients if either spouse could financially gain from the death of the other. "This is just one more thing we have to notify people about. Frankly, I'm not in favor," said insurance broker Pat Tuohy of San Ramon Insurance Agency.

How about ex spouses? My ex had a 200K policy on me while we were married. He suddenly was flush with cash, according to the kids, about 3 months after his mother passed away(we think the vulture took a policy out on her knowing whe was dying). Of course, a brother of his had to pick up the cost of the funeral. I've been advised to investigate the possiblility. Any way to do that?

5 posted on 07/30/2003 6:38:10 AM PDT by TheSpottedOwl (You bring tar, I'll bring feathers....recall Davis in 03!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: runningbear
Oh how I would love to hear those calls from reporters.......telling Scott how they know he's innocent!!
6 posted on 07/30/2003 6:42:54 AM PDT by OldFriend ((Dems inhabit a parallel universe))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OldFriend; All
I agree! Wouldn't you love to hear the one from Diane Sawyer(or her assistants)? Didn't Scott end up getting a Superbowl ticket for doing the interview? If true, wonder which side suggested that incentive?
7 posted on 07/30/2003 9:22:13 AM PDT by uvular
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: uvular
Evidently the calls will not be made public........cause we just don't have the right to know.........LOLOL
8 posted on 07/30/2003 9:24:12 AM PDT by OldFriend ((Dems inhabit a parallel universe))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: runningbear
Lead defense counsel Mark Geragos characterized the calls as "embarrassing" to journalists.

Great! That's how it should be. If the journalists don't want to be embarrassed, then they shouldn't be making embarrassing calls in the first place?! (gee whiz ..... duh......)

9 posted on 07/30/2003 9:26:52 AM PDT by NotJustAnotherPrettyFace
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: uvular
Well this clears one BIG thing up for me. Peterson DID buy life insurance on Laci behind her back!! Remember all the denials?? Talk about motive?? Amber, wanting to flit around with women, making money off the life insurance and the house, etc. etc. Greedy, disgusting little puke!!
10 posted on 07/30/2003 9:31:50 AM PDT by Canadian Outrage (All us Western Canuks belong South)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: OldFriend
I, too, would love to hear what the 'journalists' (I use the term loosely since most of them aren't worth much) had to say on the tapped phone calls, but for a different reason. I don't think they were sucking up to Peterson, or else why would Scotty's attny, the esteemed Garegos, call them 'sickening'? If they were smarmy, wouldn't the defense atty like them? Makes me wonder if they were accusatory, or intrusive--something not complimentary to scotty-boy. just wondering....
11 posted on 07/30/2003 11:03:04 AM PDT by MightyMouseToSaveThe Day
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: MightyMouseToSaveThe Day
They were all telling him they were on his side. That if he gave them an interview they would report favorably on him.
12 posted on 07/30/2003 11:54:26 AM PDT by OldFriend ((Dems inhabit a parallel universe))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: runningbear
Thanks for the ping, rb! We're slowly getting there.
13 posted on 07/30/2003 12:11:45 PM PDT by Sandylapper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: All
Peterson case search warrants re-sealed by appeals judge

Posted on Wed, Jul. 30, 2003

Peterson case search warrants re-sealed by appeals judge

CONTRA COSTA TIMES

The state's Fifth District Court of Appeal has overturned a Stanislaus County judge's decision to unseal initial search warrants issued during the early investigation into the disappearance of Laci Peterson.

Agreeing with defense attorneys for the woman's husband, Scott Peterson, the court ruled this afternoon that Judge Roger Beauchesne erred when he ordered in June the release of eight search warrants and their supporting information.

Lawyers for the Times and other newspapers had fought to have the documents made public, while prosecutors, police and defense attorneys had battled to keep them sealed. Opponents of the unsealing argued that Scott Peterson, who stands accused of killing his wife and unborn son, might not be able to receive a fair trial if the information in the warrants was broadcast publicly.

Peterson was arrested in April after a walker discovered the remains of his wife and the couple's first child washed up along the Richmond shoreline.

Laci Peterson had been missing since Dec. 23 or Dec. 24. Scott Peterson said he last saw his wife the morning of Christmas Eve when he left on a fishing trip to the Bay Area. His wife's remains were discovered within a few miles of the location that Peterson has told authorities he was fishing.

He has been charged with two .......


14 posted on 07/30/2003 5:40:35 PM PDT by runningbear (Lurkers beware, Freeping is public opinions based on facts, theories, and news online.......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: runningbear
ooops! Forgot to close the the bracket... lol... ;o)
15 posted on 07/30/2003 5:41:13 PM PDT by runningbear (Lurkers beware, Freeping is public opinions based on facts, theories, and news online.......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: MightyMouseToSaveThe Day
I think you make a good point about the reasoning for MG's reaction to the Journalist conversations. I am willing to bet that there are too many to count lies on tape told by Peterson. Your right, Geragos is sickened for the opposite reason he's giving.
16 posted on 07/30/2003 8:08:28 PM PDT by Canadian Outrage (All us Western Canuks belong South)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: runningbear
bear that is really interesting about keeping the "show of proof" necessary to secure those 8 search warrants sealed. The reason, imo, is that the evidence is damning against Peterson. Why the heck else would the defense fight to keep them sealed? If it was all voodoo and a royal screw up by LE WHY would MG want them kept sealed? He really has NOTHING to defend Peterson with and the Prosecution have evidence that is damning!! These sealing actions by the Judge(s), although irritating, are smart. It prevents Peterson from trying to say he didn't get a fair trial.
17 posted on 07/30/2003 8:13:08 PM PDT by Canadian Outrage (All us Western Canuks belong South)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: OldFriend
OldFriend, you wrote: "They were all telling him they were on his side. That if he gave them an interview they would report favorably on him."

Do you know that for a fact, or is this a guess on your part? If this is really true, that journalists would report favorably in exchange for an interview, why would that sicken MG? And why would he call it embarrassing? I mean, it's embarrassing to you and me, us non-'journalist' types, that they would stoop so low. But MG has stooped so low in other areas (e.g., satanic cults, and i think alien abductions aren't too far behind), why would this stooping be so embarrassing? after all, any print articles that reflected favorably on scotty would be that much easier for mg. so, i'm just wondering if you know the content of the calls for a fact, or if you're just hazarding a guess like i am.
18 posted on 07/30/2003 8:21:30 PM PDT by MightyMouseToSaveThe Day
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: uvular
Aw, but gee, Uvular, don't you know? He couldn't go to the Superbowl, b/c he had a search-for-Laci event scheduled that weekend... of course, the search-for-Laci event DID just happen to be scheduled to be located in the same city where the Superbowl was being held... coincidence, I'm sure.

19 posted on 07/30/2003 8:53:39 PM PDT by Devil_Anse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: MightyMouseToSaveThe Day
Betcha Geragos is really more worried about what was said by his client in those phone calls, not what was said by the journalists. Bet Scott contradicted himself all over the place.
20 posted on 07/30/2003 8:57:36 PM PDT by Devil_Anse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: runningbear
You may remove my name from your list. Thank you.
21 posted on 07/31/2003 12:43:22 AM PDT by hoosierskypilot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: hoosierskypilot
I believe I did, but let me check again... thanks for letting me know. ;O)
22 posted on 07/31/2003 2:36:19 AM PDT by runningbear (Lurkers beware, Freeping is public opinions based on facts, theories, and news online.......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Canadian Outrage
I believe so. I think in the long run, once the prelim is going, then the public will have an idea of what is what... and Geragos will try to have them not brought into evidence based on some phoney claim of preventing his client from getting a fair trial?
23 posted on 07/31/2003 2:38:33 AM PDT by runningbear (Lurkers beware, Freeping is public opinions based on facts, theories, and news online.......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: runningbear; All
Thanks for the ping rb.
I was watching Greta last night, they were talking about the ruling yesterday that the search warrants would not be unsealed after all.
But all of the talking heads were in agreement that the warrants will be a part of the pre-lim, whitch they agreed that will not be closed...they all said that it would be "highly unlikely the hearing will be closed."
24 posted on 07/31/2003 5:09:38 AM PDT by Jackie-O
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Devil_Anse
Bingo, devil. your guess makes the most sense. so obvious, i wish i'd realized it earlier!
25 posted on 07/31/2003 7:08:57 AM PDT by MightyMouseToSaveThe Day
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: MightyMouseToSaveThe Day
Thanks! The way to understand all that Geragos does, of course, is to simply ask, "What's in it for GERAGOS?"
26 posted on 08/01/2003 8:49:12 AM PDT by Devil_Anse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

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