• June 28, 2004
• Vol. 61
• No. 25

The Laci Trial: Anger Builds

Lawyers Tussle Over Scott Peterson's—and The Cops'—Actions in the Days After Laci Vanished

• 

From PEOPLE Magazine

Tempers are already fraying as Scott Peterson's murder trial enters its third week. At recess on June 9, after testimony favorable to Scott, Gwen Kemple–a Laci relative–loudly asked Scott's father, Lee Peterson, "What are you grinning at?" A few days later, on June 14, the tables were turned: As enraged defense attorney Mark Geragos demanded a mistrial (see box), some of Laci's family snickered. Shot back Geragos: "I don't need comments from the peanut gallery."

Meanwhile, Geragos and deputy district attorney Rick Distaso each appeared to score points. Some of the prosecution's best moments came from Modesto detective Matthew Spurlock, who testified that Peterson responded with a "blank stare" when asked what he was fishing for the day Laci disappeared and what he had used for bait. But later Geragos seemed to trip up Spurlock on whether cars could drive into East La Loma Park. (They can.) Earlier the defense lawyer had established that police saw transient "encampments" in the park; this could lay the groundwork for his theory that Laci was abducted near her home, perhaps while walking her dog in the park, and driven away in a tan van. Observes Loyola Law School professor Stan Goldman: "Every time the prosecution puts a witness on the stand, they take two steps forward and one step back."

More From This Article

Point/Counterpoint: The Trial So Far

PROSECUTION:

Modesto detective Matt Spurlock testified on June 14 that Scott Peterson muttered "f—-" and threw a flashlight after police questioned him and searched his home Dec. 24. "This is a very dramatic example of how Scott behaved," says former New York prosecutor Ruth Jones, "and, on its face, it looks very suspicious."

DEFENCE:

Though Gerago's motion for a mistrial—on the grounds that this incident should have been disclosed before the trial—was denied, Smith says, "Geragos has been effective in showing that the DA and the cops haven't had their acts together." Moreover, the failure to disclose may be grounds for appeal if Scott is convicted.EDGE: DEFENSE

PROSECUTION:

Laci relative Harvey Kemple testified that in early January he tailed Scott on two occasions after he said he was going to hang "missing" posters. One time, Peterson went to a mall and sat in his car; the other, he headed to a country club to play golf. "That is very powerful evidence for the prosecution," says former San Mateo prosecutor Chuck Smith, adding that Peterson may not have put up posters because "he knew exactly where Laci was—at the bottom of San Francisco Bay."

DEFENCE: If the prosecutions can show that Scott had a pattern of not aiding the search, then "that's damaging evidence," says Stan Goldman, Loyola Law school professor and former criminal defense attorney. if it was a one-time occurrence, "the jury may feel he just needed some space during a very stressful time," says Goldman. EDGE: PROSECUTION