| LACI & CONNER "I wish I could have been so lucky as to have been married to such a beautiful caring women" RICH ~ WI ~ GUESTBOOK |
| Dr. Charles March was expected to be a crucial witness for the defense in Scott Peterson's double-murder trial -- one who could single-handedly exonerate the former Modesto salesman by showing that the defendant's unborn baby died a week after prosecutors say the child did. But by the end of his testimony Thursday, legal analysts and jurors closed their notebooks, rolled their eyes and snickered when they thought no one was looking. "There were moments today that reminded me of Chernobyl," said Stan Goldman, a criminal law professor and legal expert for Fox News, of the cross-examination of the fertility specialist. By the end of the day, March slumped in his chair, made an exasperated noise with his lips and begged prosecutor Dave Harris to "cut me some slack" about a "typo" in his report as his slicked-back hair lost its coif and silvery brown strands fell and stuck to his forehead. March had to admit that a date in his report was incorrect, but said it was a typographical error. However, the prosecutor pointed out that the date appeared in two different places in the document. When the prosecutor pressed him on the discrepancies, March became flustered. "When an expert says, 'Cut me some slack,' it's all over," said former San Francisco prosecutor Jim Hammer, who has been sitting in on the case. But March held firm. He told jurors there is no way that Scott and Laci Peterson's unborn baby could have died any earlier than Dec. 29, 2002. The testimony runs counter to a prosecution expert who says the child died around Dec. 23, 2002 -- the day before Laci Peterson was reported missing. Prosecutors Harris, Rick Distaso and Birgit Fladager maintain that the eight-months pregnant Laci was murdered by her husband on the night of the 23rd and then dumped in San Francisco Bay the next day. She and the baby's remains were found on the Richmond shoreline less than four months later. But if March's time of death is accurate, it would rule Scott Peterson out as having killed his wife and unborn baby and bolster the defense's theory that strangers abducted Laci Peterson and kept her stashed away for more than a week before killing her. The problem, according to prosecutors, is that March didn't use science to come up with the gestational age of the baby. He relied on the word of Laci's girlfriend, who said she had been told by the victim on June 9, 2002, that a home-pregnancy test had produced a positive reading. "Where in the medical records does it talk about Laci Peterson using a pregnancy test on June 9?" prosecutor Dave Harris asked. "Nowhere," March replied, becoming obviously flustered, shifting nervously in his seat and biting his lower lip. "So you're making an assumption to form a medical opinion, isn't that correct?" Harris prodded. "Based on 30 years of being a doctor ... that's a pretty good assumption," March said. "Is it your practice to rely on someone who went to a baby shower with Laci?" Harris asked March. "Why not," he responded. "Women talk all the time." March grew increasingly flustered, and several times gave long-winded answers that Harris asked the judge to halt and consider "non-responsive.'' Harris ended a first round of questioning with a zinger. "The opinion you're giving here is without a background in anthropology or forensic pathology, and your area of expertise being in infertility?'' the prosecutor asked. "Yes sir,'' March answered, clipping his words. Greggory DeVore, a prosecution specialist in maternal-fetal medicine testified earlier in the trial that he determined by measuring the corpse's thigh bone and using information from Laci's last menstrual period and first ultrasound that the fetus was just about 33 weeks and one day old when he died. March said he used the same data, but also figured in the likely time of conception based on the home-pregnancy test. His calculations concluded that the baby was actually younger than Laci's doctors originally thought. "All the information unequivocally shows that on Dec. 23, 2002 (Laci Peterson's last doctor's appointment) the baby was six days younger and not 33 weeks and one day old." But Harris argued that nowhere in the medical records does it reflect that Laci tested positive on a home-pregnancy test on June 9, 2002. Under questioning from defense lawyer Mark Geragos, March said he had reviewed the testimony of the friend, Renee Tomlinson, concerning a June 9 phone call. Laci Peterson told Tomlinson she was pregnant during that call, which came just a day after Peterson herself had thrown a baby shower for Tomlinson. In his analysis, March assumed both that Laci Peterson made the call because she had taken a home pregnancy test that day and that she took the test on the first possible day it could have given her a positive result. When Tomlinson testified June 21, she never mentioned a home pregnancy test and did not say how Peterson knew she was pregnant. March said the call to Tomlinson would have put the date of conception at May 26, six days later than Devore concluded. "You're making an assumption -- a medical opinion based on that?'' Harris asked. "Do you have any evidence in medical records that there was a home pregnancy test on June 7 on June 8?'' "No sir,'' March said. "So we know that Ms. Peterson was pregnant sometime before July 11 and that's all we know from the medical records?'' Harris asked a little later. "That's correct,'' March said. "It sounds like much of what March based his opinion on what is a second- hand hearsay conversation and on an assumption about what Laci actually said," Hammer told reporters outside the courtroom. "This witness was pummeled, like a fighter on the ropes ... It was that stunning." -- Former prosecutor and trial watcher Chuck Smith about the prosecution's cross-examination of the defense expert witness. Jurors snuck peeks at their watches throughout March's testimony. ******* As the trial nears the end -- the prosecution and defense are expected to make their closing arguments the first two days in November -- Judge Alfred Delucchi seems to be getting more concerned with the duration of the case and the toll it has taken on the panel. "Don't worry, we're going to find a nice hotel for you guys to stay in," he said. The jurors looked at each other and laughed. The trial is scheduled to resume on Monday, October 25. HOME INDEX LACI CONNER SCOTT TRIAL ALIBI-WITNESS LIST AUTOPSY DOGS WIRETAPS LACI'S FAMILY DUCT TAPE GAG ORDERS |
| CUT ME SOME SLACK.......PLEASE...... Defense witness asks D.A. to cut him slack October 21, 2004 |
| BY: Stacy Finz and Diana Walsh |
| Geragos didn't get monies worth from this paid witness |
 |
 |
|