Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Live Today
Judge May Rule Today on Peterson Gag Order, Wiretaps
Aired June 06, 2003 - 11:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
LEON HARRIS, ANCHOR: Up first this hour on CNN, the Peterson murder case. A judge in Modesto, California, is expected to hold a hearing this hour on a prosecution motion to unseal autopsy reports of Laci Peterson and her unborn son. CNN's Elaine Quijano is covering that for us and she checks in live from Modesto, California -- Elaine.
ELAINE QUIJANO, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Hello to you, Leon.
Well, already a tremendous amount of interest in this case. Behind me there are people who have been lining up here in Stanislaus County since the early hours of the morning. You see them there behind me, both public people, as well as the members of the media.
Only about 70 seats or so in this courtroom and really today, what we're expecting to hear is about three issues, wire taps, autopsy results, also a possible gag order.
Now first those wire taps. The 69 intercepted phone calls between Scott Peterson and members of his defense team. Now Scott's lawyers accuse the D.A.'s office of prosecutorial misconduct, saying that some of the intercepts violated attorney-client privilege. They want those intercepts thrown out, they want prosecutors and investigators involved removed from the case.
Now the D.A.'s office defends the use of those wire taps, saying that their agents acted properly and within the guideline of the law.
Also today, the judge will consider a prosecution motion requesting that the autopsy reports on both Laci and her unborn son, Connor, be released to the public. The prosecution essentially last week reversing its position on this in response to some leaked information that was reported in the media.
Finally, the judge will also look at issuing a gag order to the parties involved in this case. Prosecution supports that. The defense, however, and an attorney for Amber Frey -- Amber Frey, of course, the woman who said she had an affair with Scott Peterson -- they both oppose the idea of a gag order. The defense essentially saying it wants a chance to correct any misinformation out there, Amber Frey's attorney saying that her client should have the right to speak out and defend herself against attacks on her reputation.
A busy day ahead, Leon.
HARRIS: Certainly sounds like it's going to be one. Thanks, Elaine. Elaine Quijano, reporting for us here outside the courthouse in Modesto, California.
Now for some additional insight into today's court proceedings, we're going to turn to our legal analyst, Jeffrey Toobin, who is going to be inside that courtroom. Jeffrey is standing by, also in Modesto, California.
Jeffrey, good morning. Glad to have you with us, on all of this, before you go inside the courtroom. All right. Let's start with this list of things to be considered by the court today here and wire taps, gag orders and autopsy results all being requested to be decided upon here. What do you think is at the top of the list here?
JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Well, I think what's really interesting is, if you think about how much of what's before the court relates to the fact that this is a high profile trial. The two main issues today only come up because of press interest. Releasing the autopsy reports usually is a matter of course. Autopsy reports are released, but no one pays any attention because no one covers them.
Here it's become intensely controversial because of the partial leak of that extremely disturbing report about what was found around the fetus's neck last week.
Then you have the question of a gag order. Of course, that never comes up in an ordinary case because there is no press interest in an ordinary case. Those two will be at the top of the agenda.
I think the issue of prosecutorial misconduct is frankly kind of a red herring. That was a pretty ordinary wiretap. Barring huge surprises, I don't think the judge is going to do anything to impose any sanctions on the prosecution.
HARRIS: OK. Very interesting. But also with those wiretaps, as I understand it, the press out there is also asking for some sort of action on the wiretaps because a lot of the phone calls that were recorded by the authorities were phone calls from the press calling Scott Peterson, as well.
TOOBIN: It really is astonishing to think of how deeply embedded, to coin a phrase, the press is in this case. That's right.
The authorities got a court approval for a wiretap on Scott Peterson's phone and one issue is that he -- there were some phone calls intercepted between him and his lawyers and the question there is whether there was any violation of the attorney/client privilege, but under California law, if you, John Q. Citizen, are captured on a wiretap, you have the right to those phone calls. You have the right to hear the tape.
But what if you are a reporter? That's the question that's before the court today because some of the reporters want access to their own wiretaps. That's going to be before the judge, and again, evidence of how much the press is involved here.
HARRIS: Has the judge tipped his hand at all about what direction he's leaning on this? Because I know he's got to be very concerned about not further tainting the jury pool out there. I mean, the Peterson camp is going to say that they can't get a fair trial there. We know that there's consideration about them trying to get this trial moved out of the area.
But if the press can actually get the autopsy results, there's no way in the world it's not going to get published somehow, some way. If the press can actually get more access to the wiretap information, there's no way that's not going to make its way into the press and therefore, into the public domain.
TOOBIN: I think you've really put your finger on which way the judge is leaning, which towards non-disclosure, especially when have the preliminary hearing scheduled for July, although it might be delayed. But in a preliminary hearing, virtually all of this controversial material will come out in public anyway.
I think the judge's inclination, based on what he said so far, is to keep the stuff secret for now, let the stuff that's going to come out at the preliminary hearing come out then, but don't, you know, feed the beast any further than the absolute minimum necessary to have a fair trial.
HARRIS: All right. But how soon then would you expect, Jeffrey, for this judge to make a decision and actually go ahead and announce it? Will that happen today.
TOOBIN: Well, you know, we are in California, the land where why decide today what you can decide three weeks from now. Things tend to move kind of slowly here. But the judge has indicated that a decision today is possible and, you know, I've got my ticket so I'll find out as soon as he decides.
HARRIS: Well, as soon as you find out you make sure you come back and report it to us.
TOOBIN: That's why I'm here.
HARRIS: One thing's for sure, is that you, the press and Scott Peterson aren't going anywhere. So the judge can take his time if he needs to.
TOOBIN: That's for sure. You know, Leon, I have covered a lot of high profile cases. I have almost never seen as many cameras as I've seen here. I mean, it's really shocking. I mean, it's not as much as O.J., but this is on a scale with Michael Skakel, it's on a scale with Timothy McVeigh. I mean, just here in Modesto, I mean, I think I counted two dozen cameras when Mark Geragos walked in this morning. It's really pretty astonishing.
HARRIS: I was going to ask you about that. Because we know, as far as these things go, the O.J. trial is sort of the gold standard here but...
TOOBIN: For better or worse it's the gold standard. But this is, you know, in the silver medal category. HARRIS: And that is another reason this judge has got to be very careful. If you can remember the scrutiny that will Judge Lance Ito went through with that O.J. trial. No doubt he's going to be very careful about this decision.
TOOBIN: YES. indeed. Well, you know, Judge Ito, I think, did tremendous damage to the cause of cameras in America because every judge in America is saying to himself or herself, "I don't want to be embarrassed like he was. I'm keeping those cameras out."
So you notice here, the judge doesn't prohibit cameras, but he only allows a delayed release of the tape, only after the hearing is over does the tape get released, so it's not a live broadcast. Judges do not want to have what happened to Lance Ito happen to them.
HARRIS: And that is very understandable. We're going to release you now, let you leave the cameras and go to the courtroom and get your position. All right?
Go inside, of course, Jeffrey Toobin, and once you hear something, make sure you come back and give it to us directly here.
TOOBIN: So long.
HARRIS: We appreciate that.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
Aired June 6, 2003 - 11:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
LEON HARRIS, ANCHOR: Up first this hour on CNN, the Peterson murder case. A judge in Modesto, California, is expected to hold a hearing this hour on a prosecution motion to unseal autopsy reports of Laci Peterson and her unborn son. CNN's Elaine Quijano is covering that for us and she checks in live from Modesto, California -- Elaine.
ELAINE QUIJANO, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Hello to you, Leon.
Well, already a tremendous amount of interest in this case. Behind me there are people who have been lining up here in Stanislaus County since the early hours of the morning. You see them there behind me, both public people, as well as the members of the media.
Only about 70 seats or so in this courtroom and really today, what we're expecting to hear is about three issues, wire taps, autopsy results, also a possible gag order.
Now first those wire taps. The 69 intercepted phone calls between Scott Peterson and members of his defense team. Now Scott's lawyers accuse the D.A.'s office of prosecutorial misconduct, saying that some of the intercepts violated attorney-client privilege. They want those intercepts thrown out, they want prosecutors and investigators involved removed from the case.
Now the D.A.'s office defends the use of those wire taps, saying that their agents acted properly and within the guideline of the law.
Also today, the judge will consider a prosecution motion requesting that the autopsy reports on both Laci and her unborn son, Connor, be released to the public. The prosecution essentially last week reversing its position on this in response to some leaked information that was reported in the media.
Finally, the judge will also look at issuing a gag order to the parties involved in this case. Prosecution supports that. The defense, however, and an attorney for Amber Frey -- Amber Frey, of course, the woman who said she had an affair with Scott Peterson -- they both oppose the idea of a gag order. The defense essentially saying it wants a chance to correct any misinformation out there, Amber Frey's attorney saying that her client should have the right to speak out and defend herself against attacks on her reputation.
A busy day ahead, Leon.
HARRIS: Certainly sounds like it's going to be one. Thanks, Elaine. Elaine Quijano, reporting for us here outside the courthouse in Modesto, California.
Now for some additional insight into today's court proceedings, we're going to turn to our legal analyst, Jeffrey Toobin, who is going to be inside that courtroom. Jeffrey is standing by, also in Modesto, California.
Jeffrey, good morning. Glad to have you with us, on all of this, before you go inside the courtroom. All right. Let's start with this list of things to be considered by the court today here and wire taps, gag orders and autopsy results all being requested to be decided upon here. What do you think is at the top of the list here?
JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Well, I think what's really interesting is, if you think about how much of what's before the court relates to the fact that this is a high profile trial. The two main issues today only come up because of press interest. Releasing the autopsy reports usually is a matter of course. Autopsy reports are released, but no one pays any attention because no one covers them.
Here it's become intensely controversial because of the partial leak of that extremely disturbing report about what was found around the fetus's neck last week.
Then you have the question of a gag order. Of course, that never comes up in an ordinary case because there is no press interest in an ordinary case. Those two will be at the top of the agenda.
I think the issue of prosecutorial misconduct is frankly kind of a red herring. That was a pretty ordinary wiretap. Barring huge surprises, I don't think the judge is going to do anything to impose any sanctions on the prosecution.
HARRIS: OK. Very interesting. But also with those wiretaps, as I understand it, the press out there is also asking for some sort of action on the wiretaps because a lot of the phone calls that were recorded by the authorities were phone calls from the press calling Scott Peterson, as well.
TOOBIN: It really is astonishing to think of how deeply embedded, to coin a phrase, the press is in this case. That's right.
The authorities got a court approval for a wiretap on Scott Peterson's phone and one issue is that he -- there were some phone calls intercepted between him and his lawyers and the question there is whether there was any violation of the attorney/client privilege, but under California law, if you, John Q. Citizen, are captured on a wiretap, you have the right to those phone calls. You have the right to hear the tape.
But what if you are a reporter? That's the question that's before the court today because some of the reporters want access to their own wiretaps. That's going to be before the judge, and again, evidence of how much the press is involved here.
HARRIS: Has the judge tipped his hand at all about what direction he's leaning on this? Because I know he's got to be very concerned about not further tainting the jury pool out there. I mean, the Peterson camp is going to say that they can't get a fair trial there. We know that there's consideration about them trying to get this trial moved out of the area.
But if the press can actually get the autopsy results, there's no way in the world it's not going to get published somehow, some way. If the press can actually get more access to the wiretap information, there's no way that's not going to make its way into the press and therefore, into the public domain.
TOOBIN: I think you've really put your finger on which way the judge is leaning, which towards non-disclosure, especially when have the preliminary hearing scheduled for July, although it might be delayed. But in a preliminary hearing, virtually all of this controversial material will come out in public anyway.
I think the judge's inclination, based on what he said so far, is to keep the stuff secret for now, let the stuff that's going to come out at the preliminary hearing come out then, but don't, you know, feed the beast any further than the absolute minimum necessary to have a fair trial.
HARRIS: All right. But how soon then would you expect, Jeffrey, for this judge to make a decision and actually go ahead and announce it? Will that happen today.
TOOBIN: Well, you know, we are in California, the land where why decide today what you can decide three weeks from now. Things tend to move kind of slowly here. But the judge has indicated that a decision today is possible and, you know, I've got my ticket so I'll find out as soon as he decides.
HARRIS: Well, as soon as you find out you make sure you come back and report it to us.
TOOBIN: That's why I'm here.
HARRIS: One thing's for sure, is that you, the press and Scott Peterson aren't going anywhere. So the judge can take his time if he needs to.
TOOBIN: That's for sure. You know, Leon, I have covered a lot of high profile cases. I have almost never seen as many cameras as I've seen here. I mean, it's really shocking. I mean, it's not as much as O.J., but this is on a scale with Michael Skakel, it's on a scale with Timothy McVeigh. I mean, just here in Modesto, I mean, I think I counted two dozen cameras when Mark Geragos walked in this morning. It's really pretty astonishing.
HARRIS: I was going to ask you about that. Because we know, as far as these things go, the O.J. trial is sort of the gold standard here but...
TOOBIN: For better or worse it's the gold standard. But this is, you know, in the silver medal category. HARRIS: And that is another reason this judge has got to be very careful. If you can remember the scrutiny that will Judge Lance Ito went through with that O.J. trial. No doubt he's going to be very careful about this decision.
TOOBIN: YES. indeed. Well, you know, Judge Ito, I think, did tremendous damage to the cause of cameras in America because every judge in America is saying to himself or herself, "I don't want to be embarrassed like he was. I'm keeping those cameras out."
So you notice here, the judge doesn't prohibit cameras, but he only allows a delayed release of the tape, only after the hearing is over does the tape get released, so it's not a live broadcast. Judges do not want to have what happened to Lance Ito happen to them.
HARRIS: And that is very understandable. We're going to release you now, let you leave the cameras and go to the courtroom and get your position. All right?
Go inside, of course, Jeffrey Toobin, and once you hear something, make sure you come back and give it to us directly here.
TOOBIN: So long.
HARRIS: We appreciate that.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
