Return to Transcripts main page
American Morning
Media Leaks in Scott Peterson Case
Aired August 28, 2003 - 09:15 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.
SOLEDAD O'BRIEN, CNN ANCHOR: The press and the public will not be kept out of an upcoming hearing in the murder case against Scott Peterson. An attempt by his attorneys to close a hearing on September 9 was turned down yesterday by a California appeals court in Fresno.
Meanwhile, "People" magazine says it has gotten confidential photos and documents about some of the hard evidence in the case. The material, obtained despite a gag order, will be published next week.
Joining us this morning is Elizabeth Gleick. She is the magazine's assistant managing editing.
Nice to see -- managing editor -- nice to see you -- is what I was trying to say.
ELIZABETH GLEICK, ASST. MANAGING EDITOR, "PEOPLE" MAGAZINE: Hi.
O'BRIEN: Good morning.
How did "People" magazine get access to the photos? As we just mentioned, a hard-core gag order on everyone in this case. So, obviously, someone's leaking something.
GLEICK: Well, obviously. We have some really great reporters in California. They have spent a lot of time working on this story, and they have some really good sources. But I can't say who those sources are.
O'BRIEN: Did you see the photos?
GLEICK: I did not see them myself, no.
O'BRIEN: You have described in the magazine...
GLEICK: Yes.
O'BRIEN: ... that the pictures are horrific, and obviously -- I mean, just this entire story has been a terrible story to have to cover.
GLEICK: Right.
O'BRIEN: Give me a sense of what you and your reporters uncovered.
GLEICK: Well, they looked at the crime scene photos, and they were able to really closely examine the conditions of both Laci's body and the body of little Conner. And what those photos seem to indicate, although we don't really know anything for sure, is that the bodies were in a really different state of decomposition. The baby's body was much better preserved than Laci's body. It washed up in a slightly different area.
And we can confirm what had been kind of rumored and leaked in the past that the baby was wrapped in tape, and that it's possible that that tape was not actually debris. The tape was wrapped tightly around the baby. There was a knot in it. It could have been done deliberately.
O'BRIEN: In other words, the fetus didn't float through some sort of garbage floating in the water...
GLEICK: Possibly...
O'BRIEN: ... and picked up a piece of tape.
GLEICK: Possibly not. That's right. And, in addition, there is some question about the gestational age of the fetus. Laci was 31 weeks pregnant when she disappeared. The baby that was found seems to be somewhat older and larger -- 35 to 38 weeks.
O'BRIEN: You quote a detective in the case, who says that, in fact, maybe the baby, Conner, was born alive.
GLEICK: That's right. And if, in fact that's true -- we don't know whether that's true -- but if it's true, that's pretty explosive stuff.
O'BRIEN: How do you think this impacts the case? Give me a sense of how this weighs in against or for Scott Peterson's case?
GLEICK: Well, it's just sort of a simpler case, if you think adulterous husband, pregnant wife, they have a fight, he kills her, he dumps her. That's kind of one scenario. But it's a little bit more complicated if you have to think he killed her or he kidnapped her and the baby somehow lived longer...
O'BRIEN: Do you think...
GLEICK: ... and then the baby was tortured in some way.
O'BRIEN: This information just adds a wrench in to what might be a simple case for the prosecution then. Does it work against the prosecution?
GLEICK: I think that's right. I think what we're going to be seeing are dueling experts, and for every expert that says the fetal age is this, they're going to bring in another sonogram expert who says no, no, sonograms are notoriously unreliable. And I just -- I think there is some possibility that there could be reasonable doubt.
O'BRIEN: Betsy Glick is the assistant managing editor for "People" magazine. Thanks for joining us this morning. Appreciate it. GLEICK: Sure.
BILL HEMMER, CNN ANCHOR: All right, a legal perspective, Soledad. How significant is this information to the case?
Mickey Sherman, a criminal defense attorney, is back with us here on AMERICAN MORNING.
Good morning, Mickey. Nice to see you.
MICKEY SHERMAN, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Thank you.
HEMMER: What do you make of this leak, and what's the impact?
SHERMAN: Well, you know, the problem is that most information that comes out of this is negative toward Scott Peterson. Just seeing the torso, just seeing the pictures, everyone is going to hate this guy because of, you know, the fooling around and everything.
But, if there is actual evidence that they're saying that that baby came out of the body before, and it was actually done (UNINTELLIGIBLE), somebody took that baby out of the body and strangled it, I think people can readily believe that somebody would kill their wife. They could believe that he could cheat on her. But to kill your child like, that's kind of a stretch.
HEMMER: So, you're a defense attorney. All of this information is going out in the public. You can't defend at this point. You've got a preliminary hearing in a couple of weeks. The trial is not going to start until what? Several weeks if not months after that.
SHERMAN: Months.
HEMMER: How much does it hurt you? How much does it set you back when you're trying to shape public opinion in California?
SHERMAN: Well, it's impossible, because there's a gag order. And, of course, we don't know how "People" magazine gets this. And, of course, everyone always lays it off on the defense people. I can't imagine the defense people would leak this.
The great majority of negative publicity is cumulatively going to hurt Scott Peterson. I mean, people will grasp it, well, this could happen or that could happen. But as it's pointed out, every forensic expert is going to say something different. They're going to be hired by the state to say one thing, by the defense to say another thing.
So, no one is going to actually conclude, yes, the baby was taken out beforehand. So, it's just the cumulative and negative effect of all this stuff.
HEMMER: It strikes me that this is inevitable in a high-profile case. And you've had your share.
SHERMAN: Yes, it comes with the territory. You know, I've been one to say, oh, my God, they got this. Yes, I laud them for getting it. But, of course, the best thing that could happen to "People" magazine or any reporter is that the judge pulls them in, puts them on the stand and grills them. You know, that's a badge of honor.
HEMMER: How do you think the judge will react then?
SHERMAN: I think he'll be ticked off, but there's not a lot he can do. There are so many peripheral people on both sides that love to feed these things to the media to get that not 10 minutes of fame, but 3 seconds of being courted by the likes of a Bill Hemmer.
HEMMER: But I'm in New York and not in Modesto.
SHERMAN: Well, so far.
HEMMER: Thank you, Mickey. Good to see you again -- Mickey Sherman here.
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 August 28, 2003 - 09:15 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
SOLEDAD O'BRIEN, CNN ANCHOR: The press and the public will not be kept out of an upcoming hearing in the murder case against Scott Peterson. An attempt by his attorneys to close a hearing on September 9 was turned down yesterday by a California appeals court in Fresno.
Meanwhile, "People" magazine says it has gotten confidential photos and documents about some of the hard evidence in the case. The material, obtained despite a gag order, will be published next week.
Joining us this morning is Elizabeth Gleick. She is the magazine's assistant managing editing.
Nice to see -- managing editor -- nice to see you -- is what I was trying to say.
ELIZABETH GLEICK, ASST. MANAGING EDITOR, "PEOPLE" MAGAZINE: Hi.
O'BRIEN: Good morning.
How did "People" magazine get access to the photos? As we just mentioned, a hard-core gag order on everyone in this case. So, obviously, someone's leaking something.
GLEICK: Well, obviously. We have some really great reporters in California. They have spent a lot of time working on this story, and they have some really good sources. But I can't say who those sources are.
O'BRIEN: Did you see the photos?
GLEICK: I did not see them myself, no.
O'BRIEN: You have described in the magazine...
GLEICK: Yes.
O'BRIEN: ... that the pictures are horrific, and obviously -- I mean, just this entire story has been a terrible story to have to cover.
GLEICK: Right.
O'BRIEN: Give me a sense of what you and your reporters uncovered.
GLEICK: Well, they looked at the crime scene photos, and they were able to really closely examine the conditions of both Laci's body and the body of little Conner. And what those photos seem to indicate, although we don't really know anything for sure, is that the bodies were in a really different state of decomposition. The baby's body was much better preserved than Laci's body. It washed up in a slightly different area.
And we can confirm what had been kind of rumored and leaked in the past that the baby was wrapped in tape, and that it's possible that that tape was not actually debris. The tape was wrapped tightly around the baby. There was a knot in it. It could have been done deliberately.
O'BRIEN: In other words, the fetus didn't float through some sort of garbage floating in the water...
GLEICK: Possibly...
O'BRIEN: ... and picked up a piece of tape.
GLEICK: Possibly not. That's right. And, in addition, there is some question about the gestational age of the fetus. Laci was 31 weeks pregnant when she disappeared. The baby that was found seems to be somewhat older and larger -- 35 to 38 weeks.
O'BRIEN: You quote a detective in the case, who says that, in fact, maybe the baby, Conner, was born alive.
GLEICK: That's right. And if, in fact that's true -- we don't know whether that's true -- but if it's true, that's pretty explosive stuff.
O'BRIEN: How do you think this impacts the case? Give me a sense of how this weighs in against or for Scott Peterson's case?
GLEICK: Well, it's just sort of a simpler case, if you think adulterous husband, pregnant wife, they have a fight, he kills her, he dumps her. That's kind of one scenario. But it's a little bit more complicated if you have to think he killed her or he kidnapped her and the baby somehow lived longer...
O'BRIEN: Do you think...
GLEICK: ... and then the baby was tortured in some way.
O'BRIEN: This information just adds a wrench in to what might be a simple case for the prosecution then. Does it work against the prosecution?
GLEICK: I think that's right. I think what we're going to be seeing are dueling experts, and for every expert that says the fetal age is this, they're going to bring in another sonogram expert who says no, no, sonograms are notoriously unreliable. And I just -- I think there is some possibility that there could be reasonable doubt.
O'BRIEN: Betsy Glick is the assistant managing editor for "People" magazine. Thanks for joining us this morning. Appreciate it. GLEICK: Sure.
BILL HEMMER, CNN ANCHOR: All right, a legal perspective, Soledad. How significant is this information to the case?
Mickey Sherman, a criminal defense attorney, is back with us here on AMERICAN MORNING.
Good morning, Mickey. Nice to see you.
MICKEY SHERMAN, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Thank you.
HEMMER: What do you make of this leak, and what's the impact?
SHERMAN: Well, you know, the problem is that most information that comes out of this is negative toward Scott Peterson. Just seeing the torso, just seeing the pictures, everyone is going to hate this guy because of, you know, the fooling around and everything.
But, if there is actual evidence that they're saying that that baby came out of the body before, and it was actually done (UNINTELLIGIBLE), somebody took that baby out of the body and strangled it, I think people can readily believe that somebody would kill their wife. They could believe that he could cheat on her. But to kill your child like, that's kind of a stretch.
HEMMER: So, you're a defense attorney. All of this information is going out in the public. You can't defend at this point. You've got a preliminary hearing in a couple of weeks. The trial is not going to start until what? Several weeks if not months after that.
SHERMAN: Months.
HEMMER: How much does it hurt you? How much does it set you back when you're trying to shape public opinion in California?
SHERMAN: Well, it's impossible, because there's a gag order. And, of course, we don't know how "People" magazine gets this. And, of course, everyone always lays it off on the defense people. I can't imagine the defense people would leak this.
The great majority of negative publicity is cumulatively going to hurt Scott Peterson. I mean, people will grasp it, well, this could happen or that could happen. But as it's pointed out, every forensic expert is going to say something different. They're going to be hired by the state to say one thing, by the defense to say another thing.
So, no one is going to actually conclude, yes, the baby was taken out beforehand. So, it's just the cumulative and negative effect of all this stuff.
HEMMER: It strikes me that this is inevitable in a high-profile case. And you've had your share.
SHERMAN: Yes, it comes with the territory. You know, I've been one to say, oh, my God, they got this. Yes, I laud them for getting it. But, of course, the best thing that could happen to "People" magazine or any reporter is that the judge pulls them in, puts them on the stand and grills them. You know, that's a badge of honor.
HEMMER: How do you think the judge will react then?
SHERMAN: I think he'll be ticked off, but there's not a lot he can do. There are so many peripheral people on both sides that love to feed these things to the media to get that not 10 minutes of fame, but 3 seconds of being courted by the likes of a Bill Hemmer.
HEMMER: But I'm in New York and not in Modesto.
SHERMAN: Well, so far.
HEMMER: Thank you, Mickey. Good to see you again -- Mickey Sherman here.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com.
