To contact us Click HERE
Marlene Newell has a timeline that shows a multi-faceted view of what went on December 24, 2002, the day Laci Peterson went missing.
And then she has a timeline for Christmas Day, 2002--the day the search for Laci revved into full gear, alongside the search for evidence of Scott Peterson's guilt--two different investigations, one of which would ultimately suck the life out of the other.
More from Jonna M. Spilbor at CNN:
.....The defense, ignorant of the book, was unable to argue that Frey's motivation was monetary.
Thus, by keeping the fact that she was writing her book secret, she imperiled the legitimacy of the ultimate verdict in the Peterson trial, and impeded the Peterson defense, which should have been entitled to cross-examine her on her book: the timing of her writing of it, its content, and the profits she received.
At the very least, if a witness stands to profit from a guilty verdict, the jury ought to consider that in weighing the witness' credibility. Think about it. What would the book have been called had Peterson been acquitted? "Witness for the Side that Can Get Me the Best Movie Deal"?
To the jurors, it could have been critical information. While Frey may have a right to ultimately cash in on her role in the Peterson trial, Peterson had a paramount right to have the 12 men and women who condemned him to death know about it. They didn't.
Whether you agree with his conviction or not, the fact remains that a man was on trial for his life. The "star" witness took the stand knowing she had a book deal brewing, and knowing that she stood to make a ton of money from his successful prosecution -- yet she never disclosed this fact to the jury.
That brings us to the question of whether Frey can be prosecuted - either for concealing the book or for profiting from her largely self-created role as star witness.
The California Penal Code prohibits non-experts in criminal cases from receiving compensation by virtue of their bearing witness. To this effect, it states, in part:
"A person who is a witness to an event or occurrence that he or she knows, or reasonably should know, is a crime or who has personal knowledge of facts that he or she knows, or reasonably should know, may require that person to be called as a witness in a criminal prosecution shall not accept or receive, directly or indirectly, any payment or benefit in consideration for providing information obtained as a result of witnessing the event or occurrence or having personal knowledge of the facts."
A violation of this section is a misdemeanor -- and punishment is a mere $1000 fine and/or six months in jail.
Granted, the same prosecution that enlisted Frey's help, is unlikely to prosecute her. But if it chose to, could it? My guess is yes. The question of will a district attorney's office pursue criminal charges against Frey or her publisher -- or her famed lawyer, Gloria Allred, who no doubt knew of, if not negotiated, her book contract -- most likely is a resounding, no.
The "exception" to the rule that Frey and her publisher may have on their sides, is that the prohibition does not apply once final judgment has been rendered in the action.
But when does "final judgment" occur? Peterson has not yet been sentenced. To be safe, Frey and her publisher might have waited to publish. But publishing the book now, while the case is still warm, is likely to generate more sales.
Jonna M Spilbor is a frequent guest commentator on various television news networks, where she has covered many of the nation's high-profile criminal trials. In the courtroom, she has handled hundreds of cases as a criminal defense attorney, and also served in the San Diego City Attorney's Office, Criminal Division, and the Office of the United States Attorney in the Drug Task Force and Appellate units.
14 Ağustos 2012 Salı
Once-Embattled Journalist Moves West To Pursue Law
To contact us Click HERE
Former "Journo" Stephen Glass, who made stuff up for his stories at one time, has a case before the California Supreme Court this year which will decide whether he becomes a lawyer in this state.
Upon reading this CNN story, the name Julie Hilden came up, which rang a bell. She's Stephen Glass's partner. She wrote this great piece on the Peterson case which I'm sure I've linked on this blog before.
Anyway, the story's very interesting.
Would I trust a person who lied before?
If he hand-wrote 100 letters to people he'd wronged, and sent them out one by one, yeah, maybe.
It's an interesting piece.
Glass withdrew his application to the New York State Bar in 2003, when it became obvious he would be turned down. He applied to the California Bar in 2005, after he moved to Los Angeles. The bar committee declined to find him morally fit to be a lawyer; Glass appealed and the State Bar Court sided with him last year. The California Supreme Court will have the final word, having added "In Re Glass on Admission" to its docket for 2012.
.......
After Glass and Hilden moved to Los Angeles in 2004, he applied for jobs at law firms. One of his resumes crossed the desk of Paul Zuckerman, managing partner of a plaintiff's litigation firm. He was impressed with the resume, but then he read the cover letter.
"I was familiar with the story. I knew who he was. And I kind of laughed to myself and promptly deleted his resume," Zuckerman told the bar court.
But then he thought about his own struggle with alcohol, and how he'd come back from the brink.
"I sat there, which is unusual for me, to sit there and be reflective during the day. ... I have been a liar in my life. I myself have had some problems and have had difficulties that I've overcome, and I've been given a very big second chance, and I thought that I was being incredibly judgmental ..."
He invited Glass in for an interview.
"I called him mainly because I felt ... it was wrong for me to be judgmental and to throw somebody away without ever having given them a chance or ever having talked to them," Zuckerman said. Upon meeting Glass, he became convinced that he had gone through a genuine transformation. He could see the remorse in his eyes.
He hired Glass on the spot, but at first watched him closely.
"When I first hired him, there was no way I was giving him my Social Security number and my mother's maiden name," Zuckerman told the California Bar. "He can have that today."
He advised Glass that his downfall ultimately would make him a better lawyer:
"I've always found brilliance untempered by failure is purely arrogance but brilliance that has overcome failure can be truly useful to your fellow man," he said. He's glad he opened his mind to Glass' potential.
Those who saw the promise in a 25-year-old fabulist may still feel the sting of disappointment and betrayal. But for Zuckerman and others who believe in redemption, the latest story by Stephen Glass is nothing short of fabulous. It's about a man transformed.
"I love having him at the office, because he is like my touchstone, my benchmark for honest and proper conduct. It's like 'What would Steve do?' "
Upon reading this CNN story, the name Julie Hilden came up, which rang a bell. She's Stephen Glass's partner. She wrote this great piece on the Peterson case which I'm sure I've linked on this blog before.
Anyway, the story's very interesting.
Would I trust a person who lied before?
If he hand-wrote 100 letters to people he'd wronged, and sent them out one by one, yeah, maybe.
It's an interesting piece.
Glass withdrew his application to the New York State Bar in 2003, when it became obvious he would be turned down. He applied to the California Bar in 2005, after he moved to Los Angeles. The bar committee declined to find him morally fit to be a lawyer; Glass appealed and the State Bar Court sided with him last year. The California Supreme Court will have the final word, having added "In Re Glass on Admission" to its docket for 2012.
.......
After Glass and Hilden moved to Los Angeles in 2004, he applied for jobs at law firms. One of his resumes crossed the desk of Paul Zuckerman, managing partner of a plaintiff's litigation firm. He was impressed with the resume, but then he read the cover letter.
"I was familiar with the story. I knew who he was. And I kind of laughed to myself and promptly deleted his resume," Zuckerman told the bar court.
But then he thought about his own struggle with alcohol, and how he'd come back from the brink.
"I sat there, which is unusual for me, to sit there and be reflective during the day. ... I have been a liar in my life. I myself have had some problems and have had difficulties that I've overcome, and I've been given a very big second chance, and I thought that I was being incredibly judgmental ..."
He invited Glass in for an interview.
"I called him mainly because I felt ... it was wrong for me to be judgmental and to throw somebody away without ever having given them a chance or ever having talked to them," Zuckerman said. Upon meeting Glass, he became convinced that he had gone through a genuine transformation. He could see the remorse in his eyes.
He hired Glass on the spot, but at first watched him closely.
"When I first hired him, there was no way I was giving him my Social Security number and my mother's maiden name," Zuckerman told the California Bar. "He can have that today."
He advised Glass that his downfall ultimately would make him a better lawyer:
"I've always found brilliance untempered by failure is purely arrogance but brilliance that has overcome failure can be truly useful to your fellow man," he said. He's glad he opened his mind to Glass' potential.
Those who saw the promise in a 25-year-old fabulist may still feel the sting of disappointment and betrayal. But for Zuckerman and others who believe in redemption, the latest story by Stephen Glass is nothing short of fabulous. It's about a man transformed.
"I love having him at the office, because he is like my touchstone, my benchmark for honest and proper conduct. It's like 'What would Steve do?' "
Modesto's Post Office Makes International Headlines (Sort Of)
To contact us Click HERE
Modesto, California, makes The Guardian this year....
for the travesty of what's happening to the U.S. Postal Service.
Of course, it's not just about Modesto, but that's Modesto's beautiful post office in the photo below.
SaveThePostOffice.com
On 9 June, the General Services Administration threw Modesto's downtown post office onto the auction block. Like so many other postal facilities, the Renaissance-style palazzo had long served as an anchor for downtown stores of the California town, a public space where citizens met to exchange news as well as transact business in an ennobling lobby of polished travertine and marble beneath murals of local farming activities.
The federal government once designed its post offices to elevate and inspire the public whose assets it is now selling. An architectural journal in 1918 spoke of the tutelary value of post offices:
"They are generally the most important of the local buildings, and taken together, [are] seen daily by thousands, who have little opportunity to feel the influence of the great architectural works in the large cities."
President Hoover's administration built facilities such as Modesto's in a last-ditch effort to end the Depression, before Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal unleashed a far greater torrent of public works that succeeded where Hoover had failed (pdf). In less than a decade, the Roosevelt administration built over 1,100 post offices, distinguished by fine architecture, materials and detailing, as well as by a lavish programme of public art that, for the first time, reflected back to patrons and workers their regional identity.
Mandated by the US constitution as a service vital to democracy, the post office has fallen victim to structural adjustment as well as to electronic communication. Congress has successively demanded that the US Postal Service run itself more like a business since making it a quasi-corporation in 1971. Required to provide universal service, even as the internet and private carriers cut into its profit centres, the USPS has spun into a death spiral, raising its rates as it slashes employment and service. It's now stripping its assets, as well.
The post office where I go to pick up mail in Hollywood, on Wilcox Avenue, is also beautiful. It's one of these grand old buildings and it's decorated with stamps twice as tall as human beings depicting old movie stars.
I used the USPS when I had an ebay business some years back (selling mosaic tiles which were cut from damaged vintage chintz and painted plates). They were fantastic. I do not recall them ever losing a package, as a matter of fact; and I used USPS to ship overseas, as well; mostly to Australia, Norway, Holland, and England. Their priority packages were the most frequent choice, and their tracking has always been good. And when I say they didn't lose a package, I mean it. There were a few---just a few--that got temporarily lost, and a few that came back---but they did not lose track of them.
This past week, I had the USPS lose track of a package, which hasn't happened in a long time (I still get things shipped via mail order and they've been consistent to this day). And when I went to the post office and stood in a line that stretched nearly out the door without moving, for 25 minutes, I realized: this is the start of the breakdown.
When the paid talkers say "Government is Bad and We Must Shrink It" ---this is what happens. When the paid talkers start talking profits and acting like government is a business--this is what happens. Government is not a business, nor is it meant to be run like a business. Business has profits first. The government, which is all we have standing between ourselves and lawlessness, has representation of taxpayers' interests and consumers' interest as its main objective.
These two objectives are not compatible.
That does not mean fiscal irresponsibility should reign; but at the USPS, that was not the case.
Their stamps are beautiful. They send letters anywhere in the country for under 50 cents. No one else does that.
I just ordered one of these "Keep Our Post Office Open" T shirts. Pretty good price.
Modesto, California, makes The Guardian this year....
for the travesty of what's happening to the U.S. Postal Service.
Of course, it's not just about Modesto, but that's Modesto's beautiful post office in the photo below.
SaveThePostOffice.com
On 9 June, the General Services Administration threw Modesto's downtown post office onto the auction block. Like so many other postal facilities, the Renaissance-style palazzo had long served as an anchor for downtown stores of the California town, a public space where citizens met to exchange news as well as transact business in an ennobling lobby of polished travertine and marble beneath murals of local farming activities.
The federal government once designed its post offices to elevate and inspire the public whose assets it is now selling. An architectural journal in 1918 spoke of the tutelary value of post offices:
"They are generally the most important of the local buildings, and taken together, [are] seen daily by thousands, who have little opportunity to feel the influence of the great architectural works in the large cities."
President Hoover's administration built facilities such as Modesto's in a last-ditch effort to end the Depression, before Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal unleashed a far greater torrent of public works that succeeded where Hoover had failed (pdf). In less than a decade, the Roosevelt administration built over 1,100 post offices, distinguished by fine architecture, materials and detailing, as well as by a lavish programme of public art that, for the first time, reflected back to patrons and workers their regional identity.
Mandated by the US constitution as a service vital to democracy, the post office has fallen victim to structural adjustment as well as to electronic communication. Congress has successively demanded that the US Postal Service run itself more like a business since making it a quasi-corporation in 1971. Required to provide universal service, even as the internet and private carriers cut into its profit centres, the USPS has spun into a death spiral, raising its rates as it slashes employment and service. It's now stripping its assets, as well.
The post office where I go to pick up mail in Hollywood, on Wilcox Avenue, is also beautiful. It's one of these grand old buildings and it's decorated with stamps twice as tall as human beings depicting old movie stars.
I used the USPS when I had an ebay business some years back (selling mosaic tiles which were cut from damaged vintage chintz and painted plates). They were fantastic. I do not recall them ever losing a package, as a matter of fact; and I used USPS to ship overseas, as well; mostly to Australia, Norway, Holland, and England. Their priority packages were the most frequent choice, and their tracking has always been good. And when I say they didn't lose a package, I mean it. There were a few---just a few--that got temporarily lost, and a few that came back---but they did not lose track of them.
This past week, I had the USPS lose track of a package, which hasn't happened in a long time (I still get things shipped via mail order and they've been consistent to this day). And when I went to the post office and stood in a line that stretched nearly out the door without moving, for 25 minutes, I realized: this is the start of the breakdown.
When the paid talkers say "Government is Bad and We Must Shrink It" ---this is what happens. When the paid talkers start talking profits and acting like government is a business--this is what happens. Government is not a business, nor is it meant to be run like a business. Business has profits first. The government, which is all we have standing between ourselves and lawlessness, has representation of taxpayers' interests and consumers' interest as its main objective.
These two objectives are not compatible.
That does not mean fiscal irresponsibility should reign; but at the USPS, that was not the case.
Their stamps are beautiful. They send letters anywhere in the country for under 50 cents. No one else does that.
I just ordered one of these "Keep Our Post Office Open" T shirts. Pretty good price.
Judge Delucci's Regrets
To contact us Click HERE
An entry on the Scott Peterson: Truth Be Told Facebook page illuminates what may be...a tiny corner of Judge Alfred Delucci's opinion, several weeks into the trial.
*Remember that media reports (television interviews with Peterson) were used as evidence by prosecutors in this case, which would imply that they were taken as reliable and objective.*
__________________________
CBS News reported: "Juror No. 5, an airport screener, was taped saying what sounded like "could lose today" to Rocha on Thursday. It was unclear what he meant, or whether Rocha responded."
USA Today and San Mateo Daily Journal reported: "Juror No. 5, an airport screener, was taped Thursday saying, "Could lose today," to Brent Rocha. It was unclear what the juror meant, or whether Rocha responded beyond flashing a brief smile."
The Modesto Bee reported: "The judge in Scott Peterson's trial wants to see a recording of a brief hallway exchange between a juror and Peterson's brother-in-law. Juror No. 5, who regularly greets Peterson and defense attorney Mark Geragos with nods and raised eyebrows, said something to Brent Rocha on Thursday as they passed through security screening at the Redwood City courthouse entrance.
The remark was unintelligible except for words that sounded like "lose today" at the end."
KRCA reported: "The actions of a juror in Scott Peterson's double-murder trial were being scrutinized Friday after pool video footage caught him chatting and laughing with Brent Rocha, Laci Peterson's brother, as the two passed through a courthouse metal detector.The interaction between the two occurred Thursday. It was unclear exactly what juror No. 5 said to Rocha, or whether Rocha responded beyond flashing a brief smile.On the tape, it sounds like the juror told Rocha "It looks like we may lose today."
The San Francisco Gate reported:"The juror, an airport screener, was seen on a media pool camera chatting briefly with Brent Rocha, Laci Peterson's brother, as they passed through a metal detector. "Could lose today,'' the man, identified as Juror No. 5, reportedly said to Rocha, who smiled in response."
After the hearing, Judge Delucchi responded in the courtroom with this statement-
Delucchi: "I regret to say that the media account of what took place is inaccurate."
*Remember that media reports (television interviews with Peterson) were used as evidence by prosecutors in this case, which would imply that they were taken as reliable and objective.*
__________________________
CBS News reported: "Juror No. 5, an airport screener, was taped saying what sounded like "could lose today" to Rocha on Thursday. It was unclear what he meant, or whether Rocha responded."
USA Today and San Mateo Daily Journal reported: "Juror No. 5, an airport screener, was taped Thursday saying, "Could lose today," to Brent Rocha. It was unclear what the juror meant, or whether Rocha responded beyond flashing a brief smile."
The Modesto Bee reported: "The judge in Scott Peterson's trial wants to see a recording of a brief hallway exchange between a juror and Peterson's brother-in-law. Juror No. 5, who regularly greets Peterson and defense attorney Mark Geragos with nods and raised eyebrows, said something to Brent Rocha on Thursday as they passed through security screening at the Redwood City courthouse entrance.
The remark was unintelligible except for words that sounded like "lose today" at the end."
KRCA reported: "The actions of a juror in Scott Peterson's double-murder trial were being scrutinized Friday after pool video footage caught him chatting and laughing with Brent Rocha, Laci Peterson's brother, as the two passed through a courthouse metal detector.The interaction between the two occurred Thursday. It was unclear exactly what juror No. 5 said to Rocha, or whether Rocha responded beyond flashing a brief smile.On the tape, it sounds like the juror told Rocha "It looks like we may lose today."
The San Francisco Gate reported:"The juror, an airport screener, was seen on a media pool camera chatting briefly with Brent Rocha, Laci Peterson's brother, as they passed through a metal detector. "Could lose today,'' the man, identified as Juror No. 5, reportedly said to Rocha, who smiled in response."
After the hearing, Judge Delucchi responded in the courtroom with this statement-
Delucchi: "I regret to say that the media account of what took place is inaccurate."
"I Almost Didn't Read This Book Because I Thought It Was B.S."
To contact us Click HERE
"....It was not."
Midge, Amazon reviewer from Texas
Amazon.com review of Matt Dalton's Presumed Guilty by "Midge."
"Midge" is not a shill. He or she, more likely, has pages and pages and pages of thoughtful reviews on Amazon.
Anyone giving this book a bad review already had their mind made up before reading it... if they actually read it... which I doubt. The details from the police records and the independent research and interviews of witnesses by this author were outstanding.
Originally, I was fervently of the same opinion as the jury in this case. I was positive he was guilty. I had thought the idea of a bunch of fanatics in Modesto as ludicrous...
I was wrong. After reading this book and Crier's book "A Deadly Game" which give us tons of info from police records that none of us ever heard about... nor were presented in court... I found that there was a lot more to the story than we had been told. After reading about these police reports and credible witnesses and details none of us ever knew... nor were these presented in court. These official reports and details and witness reports contain crucial details which really change the basis of what we thought we knew.
You really need to read this book and Crier's book to get the full story. I also recommend the book by the Jury as well. There was a lot of improper behavior on their part and one juror having 3 others kicked off because he did not want to waste time deliberating. He wanted to return to work and not lose income so he kept reporting jurors with letters to the judge. He was not interested in justice. He just wanted to get out of there.
The tampering the Modesto police did with the evidence and covering up crimes occurring across the street from Laci and crimes committed in clear view of the police is an atrocity. The Modesto police should be investigated and sentenced for the crimes they committed. They committed Federal crimes by denying Scott's rights by tampering with evidence and hiding details from his attorneys. These are on record in the police files as to how they buried evidence, changed dates, ignored witnesses, gave criminals deals, listened in on attorney-client privileged conversations, destroyed evidence, buried crimes and even hid a jailhouse phone recording of a criminal talking to his cohort about the pregnant woman they killed on Christmas Eve. I saw quite a bit more police file information in the book "A Deadly Game" as well. All of this is in the police files and records and verified by witnesses.
We have been lied to about a lot of things. Our beliefs were based on those lies. You need to read these two books... and read them with an open mind. I had been 100% certain of Peterson's guilt. I was wrong because the information I got from the media was wrong and they were given false info by the police.
Did you now that the tan pants Laci wore on the 23rd were hanging in her closet and identified by her sister Amy? We were told these were on her body. They were not. It was a falsehood told to the media.
Another falsehood was about Scott getting a huge insurance policy on her just before her death. That was not true. The police admitted they had told the Rocha's that to get them to turn against Scott. The only insurance they had was a family package which included retirement planning and Scott was insured for twice as much as Laci. Laci had been the one to get the insurance several years prior. So, this was not done as a prelude to her demise as had been floated by the police... and they admitted it was a ploy to create hatred against him.
The hair in the pliers could have gotten in there from anywhere. She could have used those same pliers in the house to fix her jewelry. I got my hair caught in pliers many times.
As for the concrete anchor, Scott showed the receipt where he had only bought a small bag for one and only had one bucket to mix it in. It was having problems setting up because it was below 50 degrees, so it was crumbling and didn't mix well. The photos do not show rings for multiple anchors. No one ever mentioned he had a receipt which showed the amount of concrete he had purchased.
A witness who had an office near Scott's warehouse told police that she saw Laci there on Dec 20th and since Scott had stuff piled in front of the bathroom in his warehouse... Laci had gone over to her office there to use her restroom that day. No one ever mentioned this witness. The boat was there that day where Laci could see it.
Laci's missing watch was pawned at a shop near her home but police prevented the defense from obtaining info about it and about who sold it to the pawn shop.
As for Scott having asked about selling his house and car... the police had taken his vehicles, computers, paperwork, mail and even the checks he needed to pay his employee and do his job. If you can't work, you can't pay your bills... so you either have to work or sell your house and vehicles or lose them. He could not file bankruptcy because he and Laci had previously done so. What would you do if you couldn't work or pay your bills? The comments in the police files in Crier's book showed that the police were deliberately abusing the warrants to take everything to make it impossible for him to work and pay bills to stress him out until he cracked. The police were quite amused about it according to their own comments Crier included in the other book.
Did you know that Scott had told a previous girlfriend, Katy Hansen (The one he was seeing when he graduated Cal Poly) that he had "lost" his wife? That was years before. It was a line he used for sympathy. Not an intent... but dumb on his part as was his lying. My own son, same age as Scott who also lives in the bay area, tells women whoppers like that... things like being born in Ireland and owning property in Mexico, etc. My son tells all kind of lies about traveling in Europe and SE Asia when he is juggling more than one girlfriend. He's a cad as well. It is an example of things immature cads say in their 20's & 30's when they are cheating on girlfriends and wives... I don't approve of it, but these are stupid things they say.
Did you know that Ron Grantski, Sharon Rocha's companion, was also Fishing on that same morning Dec 24, 2002 at the very SAME time... yet the Modesto police detective admitted in court on the witness stand that the Modesto police did not find out that Grantski was fishing until after Scott's trial had started. Did the police bother to interview anyone? How could they not interview someone who also had motive, opportunity and access? Especially her mother's companion... someone with the same alibi which Scott was prosecuted on. Read the court transcripts of Grantski's cross examination. He sounds like a bully.
Did you know that the robbery directly across the street from Laci occurred that morning of Dec 24, 2002. The neighbor who witnessed the robbery is on record having called it in that morning and was adamant about the date. The thieves only agreed to plead guilty if the date was changed to the 27th. The neighbors who owned the house returned home on Christmas and reported the theft to the police at the Peterson home. Other neighbors also reported the robbers on the 24th. All of this was buried by the police including Laci's getting involved.
Read more reviews at Amazon.com
Another review from "Angel Eyes":
I was an avid follower of Laci's story from the beginning when she dissapeared. I, feuled by the media reports was right on the band wagon screaming, "He's Guilty!!!" I said to myself and many others that even Stevie Wonder could see that this man was guilty and that he fully deserved whatever fate awaited him after the arrest. I cheered at the guilty verdict and kind of winced at the death penalty reccomendation and sentencing. I wanted him to have to live with what he had done. Then when the hoopla died down and I got to actually read court transcripts and realized the lack of foundation for the state's claim, I re-thought my position and the research began. Then came this book written by a former defense team investigator, I was riveted with every new revelation. I don't feel that what he is writing is conjecture. He has more inside knowledge than any other individual to produce a book yet. It completely turned my head around.
Now, more than ever, I am protesting that he should not have been found guilty in a court of law. There was reasonable doubt. Tons of it. I feel that Geragos didn't defend Scott as well as he could and should have.
This book will make you re-think your position on Scott Peterson. Even if you still think he is actually guilty, you will at least agree that there was sufficient evidence had it been presented and heard by the jury, that it would have cast enough reasonable doubt to exhonnerate Scott and maybe put a little more pressure on the police to go back and follow up on hidden leads that were never checked out.
It was just appalling to me how much information the law let fall underneath their noses, only to blind themselves to one theory and one suspect: Scott Peterson. The man never had a chance.
Hopefully, his appellate lawyers will get this all out and get Scott an aquittal. Yet, sadly, I feel he is there in San Quentin to stay. What is past is prologue. Soon, no-one will care. No-one except Scott's friends and family that love him.
"Good Advice" left this review:
I am amazed by the hostile reactions to this book. It is utterly absorbing. It takes you inside a complex, fascinating investigation, and presents powerful evidence that no one else has ever addressed -- and think of the endless one-sided chatter this case has generated. If you want to have an informed opinion about this case, Matt Dalton's book must be considered.
Midge, Amazon reviewer from Texas
Amazon.com review of Matt Dalton's Presumed Guilty by "Midge."
"Midge" is not a shill. He or she, more likely, has pages and pages and pages of thoughtful reviews on Amazon.
Anyone giving this book a bad review already had their mind made up before reading it... if they actually read it... which I doubt. The details from the police records and the independent research and interviews of witnesses by this author were outstanding.
Originally, I was fervently of the same opinion as the jury in this case. I was positive he was guilty. I had thought the idea of a bunch of fanatics in Modesto as ludicrous...
I was wrong. After reading this book and Crier's book "A Deadly Game" which give us tons of info from police records that none of us ever heard about... nor were presented in court... I found that there was a lot more to the story than we had been told. After reading about these police reports and credible witnesses and details none of us ever knew... nor were these presented in court. These official reports and details and witness reports contain crucial details which really change the basis of what we thought we knew.
You really need to read this book and Crier's book to get the full story. I also recommend the book by the Jury as well. There was a lot of improper behavior on their part and one juror having 3 others kicked off because he did not want to waste time deliberating. He wanted to return to work and not lose income so he kept reporting jurors with letters to the judge. He was not interested in justice. He just wanted to get out of there.
The tampering the Modesto police did with the evidence and covering up crimes occurring across the street from Laci and crimes committed in clear view of the police is an atrocity. The Modesto police should be investigated and sentenced for the crimes they committed. They committed Federal crimes by denying Scott's rights by tampering with evidence and hiding details from his attorneys. These are on record in the police files as to how they buried evidence, changed dates, ignored witnesses, gave criminals deals, listened in on attorney-client privileged conversations, destroyed evidence, buried crimes and even hid a jailhouse phone recording of a criminal talking to his cohort about the pregnant woman they killed on Christmas Eve. I saw quite a bit more police file information in the book "A Deadly Game" as well. All of this is in the police files and records and verified by witnesses.
We have been lied to about a lot of things. Our beliefs were based on those lies. You need to read these two books... and read them with an open mind. I had been 100% certain of Peterson's guilt. I was wrong because the information I got from the media was wrong and they were given false info by the police.
Did you now that the tan pants Laci wore on the 23rd were hanging in her closet and identified by her sister Amy? We were told these were on her body. They were not. It was a falsehood told to the media.
Another falsehood was about Scott getting a huge insurance policy on her just before her death. That was not true. The police admitted they had told the Rocha's that to get them to turn against Scott. The only insurance they had was a family package which included retirement planning and Scott was insured for twice as much as Laci. Laci had been the one to get the insurance several years prior. So, this was not done as a prelude to her demise as had been floated by the police... and they admitted it was a ploy to create hatred against him.
The hair in the pliers could have gotten in there from anywhere. She could have used those same pliers in the house to fix her jewelry. I got my hair caught in pliers many times.
As for the concrete anchor, Scott showed the receipt where he had only bought a small bag for one and only had one bucket to mix it in. It was having problems setting up because it was below 50 degrees, so it was crumbling and didn't mix well. The photos do not show rings for multiple anchors. No one ever mentioned he had a receipt which showed the amount of concrete he had purchased.
A witness who had an office near Scott's warehouse told police that she saw Laci there on Dec 20th and since Scott had stuff piled in front of the bathroom in his warehouse... Laci had gone over to her office there to use her restroom that day. No one ever mentioned this witness. The boat was there that day where Laci could see it.
Laci's missing watch was pawned at a shop near her home but police prevented the defense from obtaining info about it and about who sold it to the pawn shop.
As for Scott having asked about selling his house and car... the police had taken his vehicles, computers, paperwork, mail and even the checks he needed to pay his employee and do his job. If you can't work, you can't pay your bills... so you either have to work or sell your house and vehicles or lose them. He could not file bankruptcy because he and Laci had previously done so. What would you do if you couldn't work or pay your bills? The comments in the police files in Crier's book showed that the police were deliberately abusing the warrants to take everything to make it impossible for him to work and pay bills to stress him out until he cracked. The police were quite amused about it according to their own comments Crier included in the other book.
Did you know that Scott had told a previous girlfriend, Katy Hansen (The one he was seeing when he graduated Cal Poly) that he had "lost" his wife? That was years before. It was a line he used for sympathy. Not an intent... but dumb on his part as was his lying. My own son, same age as Scott who also lives in the bay area, tells women whoppers like that... things like being born in Ireland and owning property in Mexico, etc. My son tells all kind of lies about traveling in Europe and SE Asia when he is juggling more than one girlfriend. He's a cad as well. It is an example of things immature cads say in their 20's & 30's when they are cheating on girlfriends and wives... I don't approve of it, but these are stupid things they say.
Did you know that Ron Grantski, Sharon Rocha's companion, was also Fishing on that same morning Dec 24, 2002 at the very SAME time... yet the Modesto police detective admitted in court on the witness stand that the Modesto police did not find out that Grantski was fishing until after Scott's trial had started. Did the police bother to interview anyone? How could they not interview someone who also had motive, opportunity and access? Especially her mother's companion... someone with the same alibi which Scott was prosecuted on. Read the court transcripts of Grantski's cross examination. He sounds like a bully.
Did you know that the robbery directly across the street from Laci occurred that morning of Dec 24, 2002. The neighbor who witnessed the robbery is on record having called it in that morning and was adamant about the date. The thieves only agreed to plead guilty if the date was changed to the 27th. The neighbors who owned the house returned home on Christmas and reported the theft to the police at the Peterson home. Other neighbors also reported the robbers on the 24th. All of this was buried by the police including Laci's getting involved.
Read more reviews at Amazon.com
Another review from "Angel Eyes":
I was an avid follower of Laci's story from the beginning when she dissapeared. I, feuled by the media reports was right on the band wagon screaming, "He's Guilty!!!" I said to myself and many others that even Stevie Wonder could see that this man was guilty and that he fully deserved whatever fate awaited him after the arrest. I cheered at the guilty verdict and kind of winced at the death penalty reccomendation and sentencing. I wanted him to have to live with what he had done. Then when the hoopla died down and I got to actually read court transcripts and realized the lack of foundation for the state's claim, I re-thought my position and the research began. Then came this book written by a former defense team investigator, I was riveted with every new revelation. I don't feel that what he is writing is conjecture. He has more inside knowledge than any other individual to produce a book yet. It completely turned my head around.
Now, more than ever, I am protesting that he should not have been found guilty in a court of law. There was reasonable doubt. Tons of it. I feel that Geragos didn't defend Scott as well as he could and should have.
This book will make you re-think your position on Scott Peterson. Even if you still think he is actually guilty, you will at least agree that there was sufficient evidence had it been presented and heard by the jury, that it would have cast enough reasonable doubt to exhonnerate Scott and maybe put a little more pressure on the police to go back and follow up on hidden leads that were never checked out.
It was just appalling to me how much information the law let fall underneath their noses, only to blind themselves to one theory and one suspect: Scott Peterson. The man never had a chance.
Hopefully, his appellate lawyers will get this all out and get Scott an aquittal. Yet, sadly, I feel he is there in San Quentin to stay. What is past is prologue. Soon, no-one will care. No-one except Scott's friends and family that love him.
"Good Advice" left this review:
I am amazed by the hostile reactions to this book. It is utterly absorbing. It takes you inside a complex, fascinating investigation, and presents powerful evidence that no one else has ever addressed -- and think of the endless one-sided chatter this case has generated. If you want to have an informed opinion about this case, Matt Dalton's book must be considered.
Kaydol:
Kayıtlar (Atom)