Here's some testimony that may help explain the dog trailing evidence, and which shows the Modesto Bee got its facts wrong when the paper reported that one dog (Merlin) trailed Laci's scent from her home to Maze Boulevard.
Testimony taken from pwc-sii.com, Case Files.
For general information about Scott Peterson's appeal and an overview of the case, plus transcripts and evidence, also visit ScottPetersonAppeal.org.
From the Testimony of Cindee Valentin, dog handler/trainer
In the following testimony, Valentin describes the training of Merlin, the dog brought into the investigation on December 26th who did the vehicle trail.
Pat HARRIS (Defense): So he was passed by CARDA approximately four and a half to five months before he undertook, excuse me, approximately five and a half months before he undertook the service that is the subject of your testimony today?
VALENTIN: That's correct.
P. HARRIS: During that time afterwards, I believe it was your testimony that he had twice previously gone out on actual finds?
VALENTIN: Of the searches that he did, two of them were finds, yes.
P. HARRIS: Both of the ones that were successful, or that he found, in the Mount Diablo in and Discovery Bay, the only two where he was successful, both of those were essentially wilderness searches, were they not?
VALENTIN: That's incorrect.
P. HARRIS: Okay. Both of them were over terrain?
VALENTIN: One of them was over wilderness terrain, and one of them was in an urban environment.
P. HARRIS: The two searches that he was successful on, neither one of them involved trailing a vehicle, did it?
VALENTIN: No. Actually, yes. The second one, the one that was at the house in the housing tract, he had an option of taking vehicle trails out of there, because the gentleman drove in and out of his driveway and down the street. He opted for the footpath the freshest footpath trail.
P. HARRIS: But he did not vehicle, follow the vehicle trail, correct?
VALENTIN: No. He's trained to follow the freshest trail.
P. HARRIS: Essentially, in your note of that particular, first of all, have you turned over those notes to the District Attorney?
VALENTIN: Yes. You have them.
P. HARRIS: You have provided those?
VALENTIN: Yes.
P. HARRIS: Of the two searches?
VALENTIN: That's incorrect. There are search reports done that Contra Costa County would have to release, though.
JUDGE: Have you got those?
P. HARRIS: No, we don't.
JUDGE: Have you got a copy of those? Rick Distaso: We don't have those.
D. HARRIS: I don't think we have search reports for other searches.
JUDGE: They don't have it, so she can't give it to you.
P. HARRIS: You said on the other occasions he was, you don't want to use the term unsuccessful, he did not find eventually the person he was looking for, the thing he was looking for?
VALENTIN: That's correct.
P. HARRIS: How many times would you, approximately, say that was?
VALENTIN: I don't know. I'd have to go back and look.
P. HARRIS: Could you approximate for us?
VALENTIN: In the teens.
P. HARRIS: So he would have found what he was looking for twice, and been unable to mind what he was looking for in the teens somewhere?
VALENTIN: Yes.
From Justice For Scott Peterson:
To get the most traction out of the dog trailing on the 26th, Brocchini ensured that the media received only his interpretation, and thus we read in the ModBee:
When Contra Costa County Sheriff's Department deputies brought in a specially trained bloodhound on Thursday [Dec 26] to help in the search, it didn't head into the park. Instead, it headed to Yosemite Boulevard. Later, the dog led its handler from the Peterson house all the way to Maze Blvd.
Which, of course, was a blatant lie. Merlin led Valentin to the Gallo Winery.
Merlin actually led Valentin to Maze Boulevard, not from the Petersons' house, but from Scott's warehouse, where they started the trail. Here's the testimony:
P. HARRIS: And what happened on the third search?
VALENTIN: On the third search Detective Brocchini pointed out the door of Scott's warehouse. I took him up to that door. It was B 1. I scented him and he headed immediately east, straight out of the warehouse to North Emerald Avenue.
P. HARRIS: Okay. Where was he on North Emerald Avenue?
VALENTIN: Where?
P. HARRIS: Where was he actually on North Emerald Avenue? Was he in the middle,
VALENTIN: When he made his corner, he made the corner on the sidewalk.
P. HARRIS: And, in fact, as he went down North Emerald Avenue, he was on the sidewalk?
VALENTIN: I don't recall for sure. On North Emerald, I don't remember.
P. HARRIS: Do you recall him at any point jumping into the middle of the street? You would recollect that, wouldn't you?
VALENTIN: I don't remember if he was in the middle of the street on North Emerald at that point. He definitely was in the middle of the street traveling along North Emerald Avenue.
P. HARRIS: In your debriefing, Detective Brocchini, you never mentioned at any point the dog went into the middle of the street on North Emerald, did you?
VALENTIN: I don't, I don't remember.
P. HARRIS: Okay. Where did the dog go from there?
VALENTIN: Continued south on North Emerald to Maze Boulevard, and at Maze we headed west.
P. HARRIS: The dog at this point appeared to have picked up a scent, didn't it?
VALENTIN: Yes.
P. HARRIS: Okay. And the dog had appeared to pick up a scent that, in fact, was based on the sunglasses of Laci Peterson, correct?
VALENTIN: That's correct.
P. HARRIS: As the dog went down Maze Boulevard, it was tugging very hard, correct?
VALENTIN: Yes.
HARRIS: Detective Brocchini at that point stepped in and stopped the search, didn't he?
VALENTIN: That's correct.
P. HARRIS: This was December 27th? 26th, excuse me, I'm sorry. December 26th?
VALENTIN: I don't remember if it had been past midnight or not, but it was definitely the night that,
P. HARRIS: It was getting, I'm sorry, it was getting late at night; wasn't it?
VALENTIN: Yeah.
P. HARRIS: Okay. Despite the fact that there was a missing woman out there, whose scent had now been picked up by a dog in an area of town where very possibly she could be kept, Detective Brocchini made the decision not to pursue that scent, didn't he?
VALENTIN: Yes.
P. HARRIS: When you got to the point where Brocchini shut you down where the dog was tracking the scent, did you protest that?
VALENTIN: No.
P. HARRIS: You wanted to quit too?
VALENTIN: It was his call.
P. HARRIS: But didn't you put up a fight, you didn't say, "We have got a great scent here," "We got to move," you know, "Hit it," "The iron is hot, could have a woman in danger here"?
VALENTIN: I don't think I put up a fuss, no.
In the following testimony, Valentin explains why she felt Merlin was doing a vehicle trail, and how she can tell. In this testimony, she describes the track Merlin took leaving the Petersons' home on Covena.
VALENTIN: Okay. From the southern edge of the property at 523 Covena Avenue he headed immediately north on Covena. He then turned, at the very first intersection he turned west on Highland Drive. He went into a house on Highland Drive, 1326, I believe, Highland Drive. He went down driveway and into the backyard of the residence, circled throughout that backyard, then came back through the gate and then continued on west on Highland Drive.
D. HARRIS: Let me stop you there for a second.
VALENTIN: Yes.
D. HARRIS: You indicated he goes down this driveway to the backyard. Where does that back yard abut to?
VALENTIN: The backyard at 1326 Highland Drive is catty‑corner to the property, catty‑corner and behind the property at 523 Covena Avenue.
D. HARRIS: The Peterson property?
VALENTIN: Yes, the Peterson property.
D. HARRIS: The dog circled around the area catty‑corner to the Peterson property, and goes back out on to the street?
VALENTIN: That's correct.
D. HARRIS: Where does the dog go from there?
VALENTIN: He then continues heading west on Highland Drive. He gets to Santa Barbara Avenue. He goes several areas past that. I don't remember. It is stated in my report. And then he turned back and headed south on Santa Barbara Avenue. He crossed several intersections and came to the intersection of San Barbara Avenue and La Loma Avenue, at which point, he turned southeast on La Loma Avenue and continued to the intersection of La Loma and Yosemite Boulevard. At Yosemite Boulevard, he turned west and continued to Santa Rosa Avenue, at which point he turned south and headed down Santa Rosa Avenue. And I stopped him at the Gallo, inside of the Gallo property at the end of Santa Rosa Avenue.
D. HARRIS: Why did you stop him?
VALENTIN: As we were traveling down Santa Rosa Avenue, he wasn't showing all the signs of being on trail. And when we hit the dead end into the Gallo property, there was nowhere else to go. I could have taken him back and worked to see if there was an in‑and‑out trail there. However, with the information that we have, I stopped him and we went back to debrief with the detectives at the command post.
D. HARRIS: Now, in terms of when Merlin is working, do you use the terminology, has a strong pull on the harness?
VALENTIN: A strong pull on the harness, yes. That is a terminology that we use.
D. HARRIS: What does that mean, for the Court's information?
VALENTIN: When they are pulling strong in the harness, they are on trail and driving hard to get to the end to find the person.
D. HARRIS: And in this,
VALENTIN: Motivation.
D. HARRIS: With this particular track that's depicted in People's Number 9, where, approximately, was it that he stopped really pulling on the harness?
VALENTIN: It was after working through the intersection at Yosemite Boulevard and Santa Rosa, he wasn't giving me a strong pull in the harness. He was not, he was not, he was showing me that he really didn't have anything.
D. HARRIS: You said that you went back and you debriefed. That means you go back and you talk with the detectives at MPD about what was the, Merlin had done, what that trail meant to you; is that correct?
VALENTIN: Yes. I went back in and debriefed with them, and I told them that the trail, to me, seemed like it was a vehicle trail not a foot trail. The reason is that when with the vehicle trails, he tends to run center of the road, sometimes side‑to‑side on the road. With his foundation in tracking, training him to track, a scent, that he tends to work very close to where the person has walked. Most people don't walk down the Bott Dots on the street.
And he was pretty dedicated to always going back and checking those Bott Dots as we were traveling down through the neighborhood.
When we hit Yosemite Boulevard, he wasn't in the middle of the sidewalk where a normal person would walk. He was up against the sides of the stores on that. We did not have enough backup officers with us to be able to shut down Yosemite Boulevard, so we couldn't give him the option of working it differently.
D. HARRIS: So from your opinion, was this a track which that person the dog was scented on walked away from the residence?
VALENTIN: No. What he displayed in his body language is that the person left the residence in a vehicle.
(Emphasis added.)
So: What I take from this is that Merlin had not tracked a person via vehicle trail previously, but Valentin was pretty sure that he had Laci's scent, and that he tracked her away from her house to the Gallo winery. She describes Merlin's approach to Gallo, on Yosemite, as being carried out on the sidewalk, because there was traffic in the street (no following of Botts dots possible). She testifies for the prosecution that Merlin wasn't giving her a strong pull on the harness at Yosemite; however, it sounds, from her description, like the traffic overwhelmed the search at that point.
She does discuss Merlin pulling strongly at Maze Boulevard, but the search is called off nevertheless--even though, when you think about it, a strong pull from a search dog and a missing woman, combined, ought to make law enforcement officers think about their priorities.
Ya'd think, anyway.
Valentin's complete testimony can be read here.
Meanwhile, what the Modesto Bee wrote, in order to be correct, should have stated that Merlin led detectives to Maze Blvd. from Scott's warehouse, where the search started.
But, instead, the paper's report presented the general public with a selling point toward Peterson's guilt: a distorted report, never retracted or addressed as an issue of fact, taken at face value by Californians and Modestans who are all, at this moment in time, with Laci just missing days ago, on the edge of their seats.
Hiç yorum yok:
Yorum Gönder