| Breaking News: Deal was offered to Scott Peterson in January Scott Peterson was offered a deal by prosecutors according to newly filed defense documents. Peterson rejected deal in January. August 7, 2003 Prosecutors offered Scott Peterson a deal to spare his life within weeks of his wife's disappearance -- if he led them to her body, they would not seek the death penalty against him."Mr. Peterson, of course, did not accept the offer because he is factually innocent and did not know the location of his wife," attorney Mark Geragos wrote in a motion filed late Tuesday in Stanislaus County Superior Court. The offer is one element in a range of legal issues raised in a 20-page defense motion to prevent wiretap evidence from being presented at Peterson's trial. Prosecutors allegedly made the offer within weeks of Laci Peterson's disappearance, when police were publicly refusing to name her husband as a suspect or to rule him out. Peterson was not charged until April. "The prosecution was so intent on moving forward with a death penalty case that an offer was made to Mr. Peterson through his lawyer in January in which the prosecution indicated it would not seek the death penalty if Mr. Peterson would provide the location of Laci Peterson's body," read documents filed late Tuesday by Geragos and fellow defense attorney Kirk McAllister. Black lines were drawn through much of the documents, which appear to quote extensively from affidavits by Steve Jacobson, the district attorney's investigator who supervised the wiretaps. The affidavits outline investigators' reasons for seeking the wiretaps, and they have been sealed along with the bulk of the police documents. Prosecutors could not be reached for comment. They are under a court-imposed gag order forbidding them to discuss the investigation. The defense contends that the January offer was an indication prosecutors "treated this as a death penalty case virtually from the moment of Laci Peterson's disappearance." State laws require a court reporter to be present during all proceedings in a death penalty case so the record is preserved for appeal. But a court reporter was not present when prosecutors and a defense investigator asked Judge Wray Ladine to approve the wiretaps or during subsequent meetings about their progress, court documents show. Prosecutors maintain that it was not necessary to have a court reporter because a case does not start until a criminal complaint is filed or a grand jury is convened. Neither of those had happened when the wiretap meetings took place. Mill Valley attorney Eric Multhaup, an appellate specialist who handles capital murder cases, called the defense argument "plausible" but untried. "There's always going to be some number of arguments that makes the case law to support it, so this might be one," Multhaup said. Prosecutors maintain that they strictly followed state and federal law while operating two wiretaps on Peterson's phone that captured thousands of calls. Earlier this week, the defense took aim at the state law prosecutors relied on, saying it violates the state constitution because it allowed investigators to listen to parts of calls between Peterson and his attorney. California statute identifies certain communications, such as between a person and a priest or an attorney, as privileged. In the motion filed Tuesday, the defense contends that the law prosecutors relied on also violated Peterson's federal constitutional right to due process. Raising the federal issue opens the door for a potential appeal in federal court if Peterson is convicted and his appeals in state court are exhausted, said Diane Amann, professor of constitutional law and criminal procedure at the University of California at Davis. "If one invokes federal law, in particular federal constitutional law, then there is still room for review before federal courts," she said. "If this is true, I've never heard of case where prosecutors offered a plea deal to a suspect before he's even been arrested or charged," Assistant San Francisco District Attorney James Hammer said. "Usually before any plea agreement is done, it suggests an investigation ispretty well complete. And then it's unusual that he would be allowed to walk free for three months." But in this case, Hammer said, prosecutors could have made the offer to induce Peterson into making damaging statements that would be picked up on the wiretaps. "(Prosecutors) are going to dangle the death penalty and see if he gets scared enough to say stupid things," Hammer said. "It's called tickling." Girolami is to hear arguments about the wiretaps Sept. 9, the date set for Peterson's preliminary hearing. HOME INDEX SCOTT LACI ATTORNEY PICTURES ALIBI-WITNESS LIST MAGAZINE INDEX NEWS-STORIES AMBER |
| LACI & CONNER "My heart goes out to the families of this tragedy" Kelly - Florida - Guestbook post |