Just Call Me John Walsh

[Cadillakin]

I was unaware when I originally posted that the principal of this story, Ron Ward, would be linked to at least 3 other murders. He is now considered a serial killer. My intent when originally posting was not so much to take any credit, but rather to share my story with the other crime aficionados and to give Det. Al Brocchini, of the Modesto police, credit for his dedication to catching the bad guys, and for going out of his way to thank me for helping him. He took some unjustified bad press in the Peterson case.

About 5 years ago, there was a murder of a homeless girl near Yosemite Blvd in Modesto. Her name was Shela Polly. She had recently checked into the homeless mission and sought employment one Saturday morning at a local employment agency for which I worked. Later on that day she was found slain, hidden under branches and cover near a creek bed, less than a mile from Laci Peterson's residence.

Though I was off that day, I was told Det. Brocchini soon came to investigate. After questioning the relevant persons, he took a copy of the day roster from my place of employment, which is essentially a list of all the men and women who came and signed up for work. Later on, perhaps in a day or two he was back and his focus was clearly on a man named Ron Ward, who was seen speaking with the victim inside the agency, and later walking down the street with her. He told us that this same man (who used a few different names, most variations on Ron Ward) was wanted in Montana for murder, accused of killing and robbing a man over a small debt. But Ward was a drifter, with a record in about six states, mostly for petty crime.. and he had checked out of his hotel the day Shela Polly was slain. That was that. Or so it seemed.. Brocchini assumed Ward was on the move again and wouldn't be seen locally... but alerted the necessary agencies to keep a lookout for him.

About 3 days later, I was driving southbound on 9th street towards 99 south, and guess who I saw walking towards me? It was the suspect, Ron Ward, and his common-law wife, Hattie Baker. I immediately got on the phone with the police and left an urgent message for Brocchini to call me. Thereupon, I began following Ron and Hattie in my car.. making a u-turn to get behind them, and staying back about a hundred yards. My cell rang and it was Det. Brocchini and I told him I had Ron Ward in my sight. The couple had cut through a residential area and I was still behind them, moving up behind parked cars in the street, watching their progress. Brocchini asked for directions to the location. The couple moved to an area where I couldn't follow, up and over the 7th street railroad tracks.. The street dead-ended for car traffic and I felt a bit panicky to keep them in my sights.. All the while, I gave Brocchini a play-by-play about the goings-on. I drove fast to the location I had guessed Ron and Hattie would be after crossing the tracks and me taking the roundabout way..and there they were, just moseying down the street. I parked my car pointing away from them.. not directly in their "walking path." Ron and Hattie definitely knew me.. and I didnt want them to see me... Brocchini made his way to my location. I saw him come up under the 7th street Bridge. I told him what my car looked like.. We acknowledged each other with a nod. We were about a hundred yards apart, and Ron and Hattie were moving towards us. He asked me if I was SURE the suspect some 100 yards away was the right guy. I assured him I knew Ronnie Ward well. And as Hattie and Ron moved 30 yards behind me, Brocchini was in contact with the posse.. and boy did they come in force.. No lights, no sirens, but as I looked north, I saw police cars coming over the rise to the 7th St bridge. One after the other.. maybe a dozen cars in tandem.. and as they approached Ron and Hattie who were walking towards them, the lead car veered across both lanes and stopped.. and the other cars followed suit, The officers leapt out of their cars and took positions, all with guns ready and aimed at the suspect.. I saw the suspects fall to the ground. Then I could see no more. It was over. Ron Ward and his girl, Hattie, were arrested. When I got back to the office, the girls on-duty, Rachel and Jonetta, began humming a James Bond tune.... I laughed.. we all laughed at that.

I was impressed that Brocchini called me the next day. He called to thank me and also to apologize for what the papers and the press officer had stated. In the news, the press officer when asked how the suspect was found said, "we sometimes get calls from people in the street, homeless people, and we follow that.. they might say, you can find this guy here, and that is what happened in this case." The newspapers printed that erroneous version of events. Brocchini stated to me he hadn't talked to the press officer and perhaps that's how the officer understood the events.. I felt a little bit slighted, not that I didn't receive credit, but being referred to in the article as a homeless person who tipped the police. In fact, my co-workers made a few jokes about it.. But Brocchini made it clear by the call, he knew who helped him and he appreciated it.

Hattie, Ron's girl, turned on him and gave information that led to the recovery of the murder weapon in Montana, and Ron Ward was extradited to that state. As for his guilt in the local matter of the murdered girl, I'm not sure how it was resolved.. I had Ron in my car many times. In fact, he had good carpentry skills and I had gotten up and hour early for an entire week so as to take him to an important clients job site, assuring he wouldn't miss his 6am start time. One little detail I remember ever so clearly was a conversation Ron and I had. He told me that when he didn't get the daily work, it didn't bother him too much.. because he was alright to sleep in the street or outside, but the look upon his mates face when he failed to get a days pay was pure disdain for their circumstances. One of the workers who was listening said Shela Polly said she was saving for an apartment.. and for a desperate man who didn't get work that day, who would have to face his girl again that night without a roof to cover them, it might have been enough motivation for Ward to rob and kill her, thinking she might have some money on her person. I don't know if he did it.

Since I orignally posted this, Ron Ward has been linked to Shela Polly by his DNA. Here is his story printed about a month ago..

http://www.missoulian.com/articles/2...nal/news04.txt

[One2Snoop]

Cool story. Thanks for sharing Cadillakin.

[adnoid]

Originally Posted by Cadillakin

...Det. Al Brocchini, of the Modesto police, credit for his dedication to catching the bad guys, and for going out of his way to thank me for helping him. He took some unjustified bad press in the Peterson case. ...

Not from anyone that matters, though.

[deputydi]

That is really quite a story!!!

[Lavindar]

Originally Posted by deputydi

That is really quite a story!!!

It truly is and it upsets me when people call him a liar because Geragos asked him the questions he should have asked someone else. Even the Peterson family refers to him as the lead detective, which anyone that knows this case, KNOWS is not true. Brocchini took most of the heat from Geragos and unjustly so. He is a good detective and dedicated to his work. It's nice to hear a good story about him. Thanks, Cadi

[Cadillakin]

You know, Brocchini called me at my new job.. the one I moved to after the Peterson trial.. He was interested in securing an estimate for work on his home. I told him who I was.. and how we had interacted before.. and I thanked him for his work in our community.. for watching out for us...

He responded kindly.. and just for the briefest of moments, while we had that moment of rapport, I almost blurted out.. "Do you believe OR KNOW Scott Peterson killed and buried Laci in the night, that he took two trips to the Bay".....

But I couldn't say it.. It was too awkward.. I didn't want to put him on the spot..

[onthefence]

that is really quite a.... story.

[TopGunner]

Originally Posted by onthefence

that is really quite a.... story.

I was just about to say the same thing OTF, only in a different way.

Cadi, that story was awesome, and many thanks for taking the time to share it with us.

[enlightenme]

Originally Posted by Lavindar

It truly is and it upsets me when people call him a liar because Geragos asked him the questions he should have asked someone else. Even the Peterson family refers to him as the lead detective, which anyone that knows this case, KNOWS is not true. Brocchini took most of the heat from Geragos and unjustly so. He is a good detective and dedicated to his work. It's nice to hear a good story about him. Thanks, Cadi

If I ever have a loved one go missing, I would love to have Brocchini or someone just like him on the case. He teared up during Sharon's victim impact statement. He's a dedicated LE officer and a decent man.

[TopGunner]

Originally Posted by enlightenme

If I ever have a loved one go missing, I would love to have Brocchini or someone just like him on the case. He teared up during Sharon's victim impact statement. He's a dedicated LE officer and a decent man.

ITA EM, they put their professionalism and their heart & soul into the case. They'd be my first, second, third and ONLY choice if I ever found myself in similar circumstances. I wouldn't hire Geragos to walk my dog(s). They wouldn't like him anyway.....

[onthefence]

Originally Posted by TopGunner

ITA EM, they put their professionalism and their heart & soul into the case. They'd be my first, second, third and ONLY choice if I ever found myself in similar circumstances. I wouldn't hire Geragos to walk my dog(s). They wouldn't like him anyway.....

There are many that share your sentiments regarding Geragos.

[TopGunner]

Originally Posted by onthefence

There are many that share your sentiments regarding Geragos.

Not to hijack this thread, but anyone have any guess as to why the P's hired Geregos? One minute he's on National Television saying that the bodies washing up where ISP was fishing was just devastating to the defense, and the next thing ya know, he IS the defense. Why in the world would the P's hire him, when there are a multitude of excellent defense attny's out there. IIRC, Geregos had zero experience with murder cases also.

I will add, IMO, that regardless of who the P's hired, the outcome would have been the same, I see no way it could have been different, but I'd like to understand why they scraped the bottom of the barrel.

[Lavindar]

Originally Posted by TopGunner

Not to hijack this thread, but anyone have any guess as to why the P's hired Geregos? One minute he's on National Television saying that the bodies washing up where ISP was fishing was just devastating to the defense, and the next thing ya know, he IS the defense. Why in the world would the P's hire him, when there are a multitude of excellent defense attny's out there. IIRC, Geregos had zero experience with murder cases also.

I will add, IMO, that regardless of who the P's hired, the outcome would have been the same, I see no way it could have been different, but I'd like to understand why they scraped the bottom of the barrel.

IMO they wanted a high-profile attorney. They didn't care if he was any good - just that he was high-profile - and that he'd kick those hick prosecutors from that little town on their butts. How sad. I would never want my live hinging on the words of a media-prone atty. They are in it for the media hype, not for the defendant. If you don't believe me, look at his performance in the Cam Brown trial. He took a hike after promising never to desert his client.

[onthefence]

Originally Posted by TopGunner

Not to hijack this thread, but anyone have any guess as to why the P's hired Geregos? One minute he's on National Television saying that the bodies washing up where ISP was fishing was just devastating to the defense, and the next thing ya know, he IS the defense. Why in the world would the P's hire him, when there are a multitude of excellent defense attny's out there. IIRC, Geregos had zero experience with murder cases also.

I will add, IMO, that regardless of who the P's hired, the outcome would have been the same, I see no way it could have been different, but I'd like to understand why they scraped the bottom of the barrel.

Where the bodies turned up is the one and only thing that points to Scott and to Scott only. There are tons of other people that had access to the bay, but that Scott had a receipt that put him there on the day Laci disappeared and that she was found in the same general area is a pretty big coinkydink. What ARE the odds? Is it possible that someone held her captive and then dumped both bodies? Maybe. Possible, yes, Likely, no. As I said in a previous post, this is the reason on the Guilty side that keeps me on the fence. The list of assumptions that I borrowed/posted and were deleted for some reason-albeit a handful were weak, (but most were as strong as the assumptions made by G's about various things) sum up much of the NG side that keeps me on the fence. don't believe the boat was a secret.

The P's were thrust into a crushing media feeding frenzy that most people have never seen the likes of and like the most of us, would have NO CLUE, really, about whom to hire. Certainly were not in the best state of mind to make good decisions and hindsight is always 20/20.
They needed someone with media savvy. However, if Scott had followed the advice of his first lawyer, the regular guy lawyer from cow town (P's characterization)Modesto & stayed off the phone and no D.Sawyer interview, he might have stood a snowballs chance in h#ll and Geragos might have been able to pull off a hung jury. They should have hired someone with a good success rate in capital murder cases.

[TopGunner]

Originally Posted by onthefence

Where the bodies turned up is the one and only thing that points to Scott and to Scott only. There are tons of other people that had access to the bay, but that Scott had a receipt that put him there on the day Laci disappeared and that she was found in the same general area is a pretty big coinkydink. What ARE the odds? Is it possible that someone held her captive and then dumped both bodies? Maybe. Possible, yes, Likely, no. As I said in a previous post, this is the reason on the Guilty side that keeps me on the fence. The list of assumptions that I borrowed/posted and were deleted for some reason-albeit a handful were weak, (but most were as strong as the assumptions made by G's about various things) sum up much of the NG side that keeps me on the fence. don't believe the boat was a secret.

The P's were thrust into a crushing media feeding frenzy that most people have never seen the likes of and like the most of us, would have NO CLUE, really, about whom to hire. Certainly were not in the best state of mind to make good decisions and hindsight is always 20/20.
They needed someone with media savvy. However, if Scott had followed the advice of his first lawyer, the regular guy lawyer from cow town (P's characterization)Modesto & stayed off the phone and no D.Sawyer interview, he might have stood a snowballs chance in h#ll and Geragos might have been able to pull off a hung jury. They should have hired someone with a good success rate in capital murder cases.

I beg to differ OTF. The CHANCES of some hick burglars stealing Laci (as she confronted them, along with McKenzie) in the 10 minute window of time available, and they took her home to change her cloths. Held her captive in a tub somewhere for 4 months, while delivering Conner in the most amazing of ways, i.e., no vaginal birth or cesarean birth - LEAVING NO EVIDENCE ANYWHERE, and then planting the bodies NOT where ISP was fishing, but 2 days apart, and 2 miles away. Now, IMO, if ANYBODY buys into that theory, framing a fertilizer sales rep, then they're just not the least bit interested in facts and reality. Only in *winning*, which speaks for itself.

The P's managed to pull of quite a bit while "grieving" for Laci. Now suddenly they didn't have their wits about them to choose a lawyer? Okie dokie. Doesn't matter, there never would have been a hung trial. He'd be right where he is regardless of who defended him and who sat on that jury. Right where he deserves to be.

[Invrdv8]

Originally Posted by TopGunner

Not to hijack this thread, but anyone have any guess as to why the P's hired Geregos? One minute he's on National Television saying that the bodies washing up where ISP was fishing was just devastating to the defense, and the next thing ya know, he IS the defense. Why in the world would the P's hire him, when there are a multitude of excellent defense attny's out there. IIRC, Geregos had zero experience with murder cases also.

I will add, IMO, that regardless of who the P's hired, the outcome would have been the same, I see no way it could have been different, but I'd like to understand why they scraped the bottom of the barrel.

That's a question I've been asking from the git-go. WHY would any parent hire an attorney to defend their son when he's pretty much said Scott's goose was already cooked? Then I asked myself what the Peterson's could have said to Geragos that made him take the case and claim he'd prove Scott "stone cold innocent". I've come to the conclusion that the answer to the latter question is simple ie; "ONE MILLION DOLLARS and there's more where that came from." What did Geragos have to lose? He wouldn't have to pay the money back if he lost the case. To be honest I don't believe we can get the answers to why the Petersons hired Geragos from anybody except the Petersons. JMO

[Invrdv8]

Originally Posted by onthefence

Where the bodies turned up is the one and only thing that points to Scott and to Scott only. There are tons of other people that had access to the bay, but that Scott had a receipt that put him there on the day Laci disappeared and that she was found in the same general area is a pretty big coinkydink. What ARE the odds? Is it possible that someone held her captive and then dumped both bodies? Maybe. Possible, yes, Likely, no. As I said in a previous post, this is the reason on the Guilty side that keeps me on the fence. The list of assumptions that I borrowed/posted and were deleted for some reason-albeit a handful were weak, (but most were as strong as the assumptions made by G's about various things) sum up much of the NG side that keeps me on the fence. don't believe the boat was a secret.

The P's were thrust into a crushing media feeding frenzy that most people have never seen the likes of and like the most of us, would have NO CLUE, really, about whom to hire. Certainly were not in the best state of mind to make good decisions and hindsight is always 20/20.
They needed someone with media savvy. However, if Scott had followed the advice of his first lawyer, the regular guy lawyer from cow town (P's characterization)Modesto & stayed off the phone and no D.Sawyer interview, he might have stood a snowballs chance in h#ll and Geragos might have been able to pull off a hung jury. They should have hired someone with a good success rate in capital murder cases.

The Peterson's may not have known who was the best attorney to hire to defend Scott but, what parent in their right mind would hire an attorney who had already said things were looking really bad for Scott? The only "media savvy" Geragos had/has was how to play the media to his favor. The sunglasses, the cell phone stuck on his ear, the strut and the ridiculous comments didn't benefit Scott in the least!

[adnoid]

Originally Posted by TopGunner

ITA EM, they put their professionalism and their heart & soul into the case. They'd be my first, second, third and ONLY choice if I ever found myself in similar circumstances... wouldn't hire Geragos to walk my dog(s). They wouldn't like him anyway...

Well, I wouldn't be so quick to condemn..! From my point of view, when the guilty hire Geragos they get convicted - I consider this fact a positive point in the pursuit of justice..!

[deputydi]

Originally Posted by Invrdv8

That's a question I've been asking from the git-go. WHY would any parent hire an attorney to defend their son when he's pretty much said Scott's goose was already cooked? Then I asked myself what the Peterson's could have said to Geragos that made him take the case and claim he'd prove Scott "stone cold innocent". I've come to the conclusion that the answer to the latter question is simple ie; "ONE MILLION DOLLARS and there's more where that came from." What did Geragos have to lose? He wouldn't have to pay the money back if he lost the case. To be honest I don't believe we can get the answers to why the Petersons hired Geragos from anybody except the Petersons. JMO

That's another one of those things we're never going to know or understand. I could never figure out why the Ps hired Geragos either. I've always wondered what they said to him that "turned him around". Must have been a doozy. Or, as you said, MONEY TALKS.

High profile attorneys are a dime a dozen in CA and almost all are better equipped and more experienced at trying murder cases. Why Geragos??????

[Cadillakin]

Originally Posted by deputydi

That's another one of those things we're never going to know or understand. I could never figure out why the Ps hired Geragos either. I've always wondered what they said to him that "turned him around". Must have been a doozy. Or, as you said, MONEY TALKS.

High profile attorneys are a dime a dozen in CA and almost all are better equipped and more experienced at trying murder cases. Why Geragos??????

The guy they had in Modesto, Kirk McAllister, has an absolutely sterling reputation .. Two separate people who know about these things told me he was the best in Modesto, by far. And if you saw him questioning the officers in the prelim, he was outstanding and very intimidating...

It's a good thing the elder Petersons are no smarter than their son..

[I'mSun]

Originally Posted by adnoid

Well, I wouldn't be so quick to condemn..! From my point of view, when the guilty hire Geragos they get convicted - I consider this fact a positive point in the pursuit of justice..!

In the pursuit of...um, tipping scales?

[Invrdv8]

Originally Posted by Cadillakin

The guy they had in Modesto, Kirk McAllister, has an absolutely sterling reputation .. Two separate people who know about these things told me he was the best in Modesto, by far. And if you saw him questioning the officers in the prelim, he was outstanding and very intimidating...

It's a good thing the elder Petersons are no smarter than their son..

Your last comment is a little confusing. Are you saying if the Peterson's had retained McAllister to defend Scott the trial may have had a different outcome?

[onthefence]

Originally Posted by Invrdv8

The Peterson's may not have known who was the best attorney to hire to defend Scott but, what parent in their right mind would hire an attorney who had already said things were looking really bad for Scott? The only "media savvy" Geragos had/has was how to play the media to his favor. The sunglasses, the cell phone stuck on his ear, the strut and the ridiculous comments didn't benefit Scott in the least!

Who knows. Geragos obviously had faith, albeit misguided, that he would do a good job-dont' think he would have taken the case otherwise-and risked his reputation, which imo, was tarnished and hasn't recovered from (based on the # of Tv appearance pre-Peterson, vs. post Peterson). Thought I read somewhere that McAllister wouldn't represent Scott after he continued talking on the phone, to the media and giving interviews (against KM's advice-which imo, was the best legal advice SP received through the entire thing).

So, with McCallister (sp?) gone, P's were overwhelmed and MG must have talked a good game, seemed a port in the storm, told them what they wanted to hear.

[Invrdv8]

Originally Posted by onthefence

Who knows. Geragos obviously had faith, albeit misguided, that he would do a good job-dont' think he would have taken the case otherwise-and risked his reputation, which imo, was tarnished and hasn't recovered from (based on the # of Tv appearance pre-Peterson, vs. post Peterson). Thought I read somewhere that McAllister wouldn't represent Scott after he continued talking on the phone, to the media and giving interviews (against KM's advice-which imo, was the best legal advice SP received through the entire thing).

So, with McCallister (sp?) gone, P's were overwhelmed and MG must have talked a good game, seemed a port in the storm, told them what they wanted to hear.

Wasn't it the other way around? Didn't the Peterson's go to Geragos and convince him that Scott was innocent? I would think that what Geragos was saying on national TV would have sent them in the opposite direction. I think you're right though about McAllister. I think he was very upset that Scott wouldn't keep his mouth shut.

[Cadillakin]

Originally Posted by Invrdv8

Your last comment is a little confusing. Are you saying if the Peterson's had retained McAllister to defend Scott the trial may have had a different outcome?

Yes, that's what I'm saying.

[Cadillakin]

Originally Posted by Invrdv8

Wasn't it the other way around? Didn't the Peterson's go to Geragos and convince him that Scott was innocent?

Ah c'mon, there ain't a chance in China that Geragos actually believed Scott was innocent.

[cookiewench]

Originally Posted by Invrdv8

That's a question I've been asking from the git-go. WHY would any parent hire an attorney to defend their son when he's pretty much said Scott's goose was already cooked?

To shut him up.

What better PR for Scott than to have the attorney who'd been saying he's a sociopath to now be claiming he's "stone cold innocent"?

[onthefence]

Originally Posted by Invrdv8

Wasn't it the other way around? Didn't the Peterson's go to Geragos and convince him that Scott was innocent? I would think that what Geragos was saying on national TV would have sent them in the opposite direction. I think you're right though about McAllister. I think he was very upset that Scott wouldn't keep his mouth shut.

not sure who went to whom, but, think you might be right that they went to him. Did they really convince Geragos that he was innocent? we will probably never know. geragos was convinced he could help them and/or help himself and that was a grave miscalculation (one of many to come).

do not think the outcome would have been that much different had Scott P hired McCallister for the trial etc because SP didn't listen to his attorney. Scott P's biggest problem was his mouth. If he had followed McCallisters advice and kept off the phone and kept his mouth shut publicly there might have been a snowball's chance in h#ll of a different outcome. Had there been no Amber tapes there could possibly have been a hung jury, imo. Amber tapes were not evidence of much imo, and she was not motive but the tapes were crucial to the prosecution case.

[deputydi]

Originally Posted by Cadillakin

The guy they had in Modesto, Kirk McAllister, has an absolutely sterling reputation .. Two separate people who know about these things told me he was the best in Modesto, by far. And if you saw him questioning the officers in the prelim, he was outstanding and very intimidating...

It's a good thing the elder Petersons are no smarter than their son..

Time certainly does dim the memory. For some reason I thought Kirk McAllister wouldn't take Scott's case because he wasn't a criminal defense attorney. Do I have him confused with someone else?

[Lavindar]

Originally Posted by deputydi

Time certainly does dim the memory. For some reason I thought Kirk McAllister wouldn't take Scott's case because he wasn't a criminal defense attorney. Do I have him confused with someone else?

I think you have him confused with someone else. Kirk McAllister, as I have heard from someone in the legal field, has a stellar reputation in Modesto. And he IS a criminal defense lawyer.

[onthefence]

Originally Posted by Cadillakin

The guy they had in Modesto, Kirk McAllister, has an absolutely sterling reputation .. Two separate people who know about these things told me he was the best in Modesto, by far. And if you saw him questioning the officers in the prelim, he was outstanding and very intimidating...

It's a good thing the elder Petersons are no smarter than their son..

Interesting what Kirk Mcaliister (the Modesto attorney with a sterling rep) had to say about the police investigation in an interview with Maria Shriver:
"The police approached this entire case of 'We have our theory, don't confuse me
with the facts,'" said McAllister, a high-priced defense attorney in Modesto.
http://www.findlaci2003.us/mcallister.html

or in another interview: Kirk McAllister (pictured left) said his office has uncovered evidence that will exonerate Peterson -- evidence that will be turned over to his new attorney.McAllister told NBC 11 in San Francisco that the defense's case is "strong." When asked why, he said, "because we investigated it instead of calling press conferences like the police did."

He sounds a lot like Geragos, actually-what was this evidence that both seemed to have that would exonerate him and or prove him stone cold innocent?

[onthefence]

Originally Posted by Lavindar

IMO they wanted a high-profile attorney. They didn't care if he was any good - just that he was high-profile - and that he'd kick those hick prosecutors from that little town on their butts. How sad. I would never want my live hinging on the words of a media-prone atty. They are in it for the media hype, not for the defendant. If you don't believe me, look at his performance in the Cam Brown trial. He took a hike after promising never to desert his client.

I disagree that they didn't care whether or not he was any good, that makes no sense. they probably assumed some things that they should not have-like just because he was high profile meant he knew how to try/was experienced in trying high profile capital murder cases.

[accordn2me]

Originally Posted by Cadillakin

Yes, that's what I'm saying.

Well, why?

I guess anything is possible. But nothing changes this:

(originally posted by Miss Bootsie)

Scott -"I lost my wife"-Dec. 06 Shawn Sibley

Scott - Search for boat - Dec. 07 Lydell Wall

Scott - "I lost my wife" - Dec. 09 Amber Frey

Scott - Purchased boat - Dec. 09 Bruce Peterson

Laci - Disappeared on 12-24-02

Scott - Boat - SF Bay - 12-24-02

Bodies - found ashore - same vicinity---- Scott - boat - 12-24

Conner in utero - Dr. Brian Peterson - Expert

Trajectory created for Conner – Dr. Cheng - Expert

Laci – marine environment – Dr. Galloway - Expert

[TopGunner]

Originally Posted by onthefence

Interesting what Kirk Mcaliister (the Modesto attorney with a sterling rep) had to say about the police investigation in an interview with Maria Shriver:
"The police approached this entire case of 'We have our theory, don't confuse me
with the facts,'" said McAllister, a high-priced defense attorney in Modesto.
http://www.findlaci2003.us/mcallister.html

or in another interview: Kirk McAllister (pictured left) said his office has uncovered evidence that will exonerate Peterson -- evidence that will be turned over to his new attorney.McAllister told NBC 11 in San Francisco that the defense's case is "strong." When asked why, he said, "because we investigated it instead of calling press conferences like the police did."

He sounds a lot like Geragos, actually-what was this evidence that both seemed to have that would exonerate him and or prove him stone cold innocent?

I totally agree, and I have to say the 'ol "police botched it" excuse is just that, old. You'd think with the money these guys earn they could be a little bit more creative.

[TopGunner]

Originally Posted by onthefence

I disagree that they didn't care whether or not he was any good, that makes no sense. they probably assumed some things that they should not have-like just because he was high profile meant he knew how to try/was experienced in trying high profile capital murder cases.

You know..........after pondering this for just a little bit, my gut feeling is that the P's hired Geregos to make them look good, to make it look like they could swim with the sharks, hire the big guns, that they rate. I really think it was a combination of appearances (look who we have!!!) because Geregos was well known, and Geregos filling them with a bunch of bs.

Had there been a lawyer equally qualified but unknown, I don't think they would have looked twice, even at half the rate. ($$$)

[TopGunner]

Originally Posted by accordn2me

Well, why?

I guess anything is possible. But nothing changes this:

I agree with you Acorn, even Perry Mason woulda lost this one. And you know, I actually feel a bit of compassion for the P's believing he's going to get out at some point in time. I'm sure people have filled their heads with a bunch (more) empty promises, but personally, I have no worries that he'll ever see outside the walls of SQ. Would have been better if they had just accepted the truth and moved on with their lives as best they could.

[onthefence]

Originally Posted by TopGunner

You know..........after pondering this for just a little bit, my gut feeling is that the P's hired Geregos to make them look good, to make it look like they could swim with the sharks, hire the big guns, that they rate. I really think it was a combination of appearances (look who we have!!!) because Geregos was well known, and Geregos filling them with a bunch of bs.

Had there been a lawyer equally qualified but unknown, I don't think they would have looked twice, even at half the rate. ($$$)

I agree that perception and appearances were very important part of this case and trial.

[Cadillakin]

Originally Posted by onthefence

Interesting what Kirk Mcaliister (the Modesto attorney with a sterling rep) had to say about the police investigation in an interview with Maria Shriver:
"The police approached this entire case of 'We have our theory, don't confuse me
with the facts,'" said McAllister, a high-priced defense attorney in Modesto.
http://www.findlaci2003.us/mcallister.html

or in another interview: Kirk McAllister (pictured left) said his office has uncovered evidence that will exonerate Peterson -- evidence that will be turned over to his new attorney.McAllister told NBC 11 in San Francisco that the defense's case is "strong." When asked why, he said, "because we investigated it instead of calling press conferences like the police did."

He sounds a lot like Geragos, actually-what was this evidence that both seemed to have that would exonerate him and or prove him stone cold innocent?

McAllister is NOTHING like Geragos. In the courtroom, he is a pitbull, not a charming, debonair showman. He is all substance... I watched him one day and and all I could think was Whoooaaaaa... This guy is tough.

I have no idea of any exonerating evidence.. Obviously there wasn't any. But in the beginning, there are lots of phony witnesses and people who say they know or saw things they didn't. Alot like the NG's who say they have exonerating evidence, but are sitting on it.. You know the BS floating around. You pasted it some of it the other day in your 100 reasons post.

IMO, McAllister was going to put the police on trial.. He knows many of them, and reportedly is not too friendly with a couple of them. That strategy may not have worked as the MPD were reportedly outstanding on the witness stand, but in any event, he would have done everything much better than Geragos.. I'm sure of that.

[deputydi]

Originally Posted by onthefence

Interesting what Kirk Mcaliister (the Modesto attorney with a sterling rep) had to say about the police investigation in an interview with Maria Shriver:
"The police approached this entire case of 'We have our theory, don't confuse me
with the facts,'" said McAllister, a high-priced defense attorney in Modesto.
http://www.findlaci2003.us/mcallister.html

or in another interview: Kirk McAllister (pictured left) said his office has uncovered evidence that will exonerate Peterson -- evidence that will be turned over to his new attorney.McAllister told NBC 11 in San Francisco that the defense's case is "strong." When asked why, he said, "because we investigated it instead of calling press conferences like the police did."

He sounds a lot like Geragos, actually-what was this evidence that both seemed to have that would exonerate him and or prove him stone cold innocent?

I guess Kirk McAllister is still sitting on this "evidence that will exonerate Peterson". Surely, if he had turned it over to "his new attorney" (MG) Scott would be a free man today. Or, maybe it's in those secret papers that some posters are holding on to. Poor Scott -- all this exonerating evidence and he still sits on death row.

[Wearing A Halo]

NG knows that the Ps contacted three high-profile lawyers before hiring MG. She never said who the three were and neither have the Ps.

http://www.courttv.com/talk/chat_tra...-peterson.html

MG said, "It's the ultimate challenge for a defense lawyer. And after talking to Jackie and Lee Peterson (Scott's parents), I completely became convinced (that defending him) was something that needed to be done."

As for MG and his reputation, MG said, “I’m not concerned about my career or reputation,” he said in a telephone interview. “I’m concerned about my client.”

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...type=printable

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6716860/from/RL.2/

The Ps have not said why MG, but, "Even with private lawyer, public can still pay for murder defense."

http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/05/02/ctv.peterson.case/

http://www.courttv.com/trials/peters...funds_ctv.html

Then there is always this by MG: "...because it's a death penalty case, I always want to leave open the option for whoever the appellate lawyer is if they want to take a shot at me for ineffective assistance of counsel, I'd be more than happy."

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIP...06/lkl.01.html