| Warrants don't reveal whose calls tracked in Peterson mystery Published: June 17, 2003 FULL STORY Authorities investigating Laci Peterson's death recently used a search warrant to obtain 46 pages of wireless phone records and a surveillance video,according to court documents made available Monday. Also Monday, the state Supreme Court rejected a media request to prevent prosecutors and defense attorneys from listening to wiretapped conversations between Scott Peterson and journalists. The search warrant documents disclosed Monday do not specify whose phone records were involved, but they say the search warrant pertained to the "Scott Peterson investigation." Authorities served the warrant on five telecommunications companies -- AT&T Wireless, Nextel, Cingular, Sprint and SBC -- between May 29 and June 5, according to documents signed by Steven Jacobson, an investigator with the Stanislaus County district attorney's office. Authorities received between two and 15 pages of subscriber information from each of the companies, the documents show. But AT&T Wireless was the only company that provided "toll information." That information was for a cellular phone with a San Francisco area code. Ritch Blasi, a company spokesman, said toll information is typically data about calls. The documents also indicate that a FedEx envelope contained a smaller envelope marked "Surveillance video F239466," which held a CD or DVD. An AT&T Wireless envelope also marked "File 239466" was enclosed in the same FedEX envelope. FedEx tracking information showed the larger envelope was shipped from Riviera Beach, Fla. AT&T Wireless has a multi-service facility there that houses sales, marketing and other units, Blasi said. He referred questions about the search warrant to prosecutors, but said AT&T Wireless does not process surveillance videos. The video could be from a store camera, San Francisco Assistant District Attorney James Hammer said. "If the police set up their own surveillance, they wouldn't need a search warrant," Hammers said. "My hunch is it is something kept in the normal course of business. The police became aware of it and wanted a copy." Jacobson wrote that all materials in question came from telecommunication companies. That suggests that the surveillance recording did not come from, for example, a convenience store or a seaside marina. McGeorge School of Law professor David W. Miller said investigators may have information that could be relevant to the slayings if key calls were made by Peterson on a cell phone. Hammer noted that "casting a wide net" is part of an investigation, and "not every net catches something." Other records remain sealed The search warrant is the 10th in the case that judges have sealed, according to court documents. They've also sealed autopsy reports, arrest warrant documents and additions to two search warrants. Judge Roger M. Beauchesne ordered eight of the search warrants to be unsealed July 8, but the prosecution or defense could appeal that ruling. Monday's revelations came because Judge Michael Cummins did not order the list of items obtained through the warrant to be sealed. The rest of the search warrant is conditionally sealed pending a June 26 hearing before Judge Al Girolami. Girolami also is scheduled to hear a defense motion for sanctions against prosecutors after investigators intercepted calls between Peterson and his attorney. The state Supreme Court's refusal Monday to review a request brought by media, including The Bee, cleared the way for prosecutors and defense attorneys to use Peterson's conversations with reporters in court. Twenty of 22 newspaper and television journalists whose conversations were intercepted from Jan. 10 to Feb 4 and April 15 to April 18 had hoped to keep attorneys on both sides away from those conversations. Four are Bee reporters. Media lawyers argued in a court brief that informants "will be much less forthcoming with information, much to the public's detriment," if people learn that talking with reporters could open them to government eavesdropping. Press 'wandered' into probe Supreme Court jurists did not issue reasons for Monday's ruling. But Terry Francke, general counsel for the California First Amendment Coalition, said the law cited by media lawyers usually is used to protectreporters from revealing unidentified sources or unpublished material -- not to bar criminal attorneys from using information legally gathered in wiretaps."The press essentially wandered into an area where government was already investigating an individual," Francke said. "It's not a case of forcing journalists to cough up what they know; government already has it." FULL STORY HOME INDEX WIRETAPS TRIAL MEMORIAL MAGAZINE INDEX ALIBI-WITNESS LIST |
| The heavens above have opened their doors for Laci & Conner They will forever shine so bright. Carole Bober - New York |
 |
|
|
 |
 |
 |