Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Live Saturday
Interview With Christopher Pixley
Aired April 26, 2003 - 18:31 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.
ANDERSON COOPER, CNN ANCHOR: From California: The court appointed lawyer for Scott Peterson must now work to save his client's life. Prosecutors have decided to seek the death penalty against Peterson. They announced that on Friday. Arrested last week on charges of murdering his pregnant wife and their unborn son Connor. The question is, what can we make out of the prosecutors' death penalty strategy? I've got a lot of questions, in fact, let's examine this with trial attorney Chris Pixley. He joins us. Chris, thanks for being with us.
CHRISTOPHER PIXLEY, TRIAL LAWYER. Thanks for having me.
COOPER: First, let's talk about what prosecutors have to prove. Do they have to prove how Laci Peterson died?
PIXLEY: Well, that's going to be one of the significant pieces of evidence that yet needs to come out. The prosecution, obviously, has been floating a lot of very valuable information to the public. We know a lot about Scott Peterson's whereabouts, and things that he's been doing leading up to his arrest. But one of the things the prosecution is going to have to prove in order to make their case is a -- how did Laci Peterson die, what's the cause of death and, secondly, what motive is there? Is there some evidence of premeditation, you know. They have charged Peterson with two counts of premeditated murder. So they're going to have to prove that.
COOPER: Did you say that because the case is not strong enough without this kind of evidence? Because there are some cases murder conviction -- people got murder convictions when there's no body at all. So no one knows how the murder took place.
PIXLEY: Now, a prosecution can be successful against Scott Peterson and conviction can be had without proving the cause of Laci Peterson's death. But right now it's probably the biggest hole in the prosecution's case. At least, that we are aware of publicly. Now, behind the scenes, there may be a lot of information that the prosecution has that they are not revealing to us, and, of course, that implicates this whole announcement yesterday of the fact that they will be pursuing the death penalty. That suggests that the prosecution thinks already they have enough evidence to get the death penalty, enough evidence to prove the cause of death, and that Scott Peterson, in fact, is responsible.
COOPER: Does that somehow change the course or the actions the prosecution is going to take or the defense is going to take, the fact that the death is on the table? PIXLEY: Well, it does. Certainly, first of all, the prosecution couldn't be going for the death penalty in California unless they had a double homicide. That's one of the special circumstances that allows them to invoke the death penalty there. And, in fact, in this case, they can do that because there's a fetal homicide statue in California that allows them to recognize the death of this unborn child, Connor, as, in fact, a murder in and of itself. So it does affect how the prosecution goes about the case. Again, they can't get a conviction without evidence of how Laci Peterson died. But right now, what they have their forensic experts working around the clock, it's just that -- that question.
COOPER: You say, the prosecution has been floating some of the evidence in public -- in a sort of a public forum. Defense -- we really have not seen that. I think there are three public defenders who are representing Scott Peterson. Do you think that's a problem that something they are going to have to start doing?
PIXLEY: They're way behind the prosecution right now, and it is a major problem for them. Obviously, we've had the changing of the guard, Scott Peterson going from having private council to just this week making an announcement that he would, in fact, be seeking state appointed public defender. And that means the public defenders office now has to play catch up. And in order for them to do that effectively, the way this case is being handled in the court of public opinion, they have got to get out of there, they have to find witnesses...
COOPER: Why -- I mean, you know, some might just say: Look, that thing is going to be decided in the courtroom, why do you have to appeal to the media, why do you have to, you know, show up on some talk show somewhere?
PIXLEY: Well, you don't have to do that. But the fact of the matter is in the 21st century today, we are having these cases tried long before they are ever seeing the inside of courtroom. And right now, Scott Peterson's public image is taking a battery. We need to reverse -- I should say that -- the defense council -- really needs to get out there and do some damage control. And that means reversing and softening the public perception of Peterson.
COOPER: All because those potential jurors are going to be influenced by what's being talked about in the public right now?
PIXLEY: It's exactly right.
COOPER: Well, that's kind of a cynical view of the whole process. I mean that, you know, you can't just get 12 people to sort of disassociate themselves from what they learned before.
PIXLEY: Well, you remember, in 1992 there was a transfer of the Rodney King case from Los Angeles County to Simmi (ph) Valley on the believe that you couldn't get jurors in an area where all the publicity and where, in fact, the event has occurred to give a fair hearing. Now, of course, in this case there has been so much media attention nationally that the concern for defense has got to be, if we don't make some statement on Scott Peterson's behalf now -- by the time we get to trial -- 12 to 18 months from now, even 24 months from now, possibly -- they won't have any chance.
COOPER: If you were representing Scott Peterson, we've got to go, but would you recommend the change of venue?
PIXLEY: I don't think he'll get a change of venue. Again, so much national attention has been given to this case -- it's not likely that there is a place outside of Modesto that would be more fair than Modesto.
COOPER: All right, Chris Pixley, I appreciate your joining us. Thanks.
PIXLEY: Thanks.
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 April 26, 2003 - 18:31 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
ANDERSON COOPER, CNN ANCHOR: From California: The court appointed lawyer for Scott Peterson must now work to save his client's life. Prosecutors have decided to seek the death penalty against Peterson. They announced that on Friday. Arrested last week on charges of murdering his pregnant wife and their unborn son Connor. The question is, what can we make out of the prosecutors' death penalty strategy? I've got a lot of questions, in fact, let's examine this with trial attorney Chris Pixley. He joins us. Chris, thanks for being with us.
CHRISTOPHER PIXLEY, TRIAL LAWYER. Thanks for having me.
COOPER: First, let's talk about what prosecutors have to prove. Do they have to prove how Laci Peterson died?
PIXLEY: Well, that's going to be one of the significant pieces of evidence that yet needs to come out. The prosecution, obviously, has been floating a lot of very valuable information to the public. We know a lot about Scott Peterson's whereabouts, and things that he's been doing leading up to his arrest. But one of the things the prosecution is going to have to prove in order to make their case is a -- how did Laci Peterson die, what's the cause of death and, secondly, what motive is there? Is there some evidence of premeditation, you know. They have charged Peterson with two counts of premeditated murder. So they're going to have to prove that.
COOPER: Did you say that because the case is not strong enough without this kind of evidence? Because there are some cases murder conviction -- people got murder convictions when there's no body at all. So no one knows how the murder took place.
PIXLEY: Now, a prosecution can be successful against Scott Peterson and conviction can be had without proving the cause of Laci Peterson's death. But right now it's probably the biggest hole in the prosecution's case. At least, that we are aware of publicly. Now, behind the scenes, there may be a lot of information that the prosecution has that they are not revealing to us, and, of course, that implicates this whole announcement yesterday of the fact that they will be pursuing the death penalty. That suggests that the prosecution thinks already they have enough evidence to get the death penalty, enough evidence to prove the cause of death, and that Scott Peterson, in fact, is responsible.
COOPER: Does that somehow change the course or the actions the prosecution is going to take or the defense is going to take, the fact that the death is on the table? PIXLEY: Well, it does. Certainly, first of all, the prosecution couldn't be going for the death penalty in California unless they had a double homicide. That's one of the special circumstances that allows them to invoke the death penalty there. And, in fact, in this case, they can do that because there's a fetal homicide statue in California that allows them to recognize the death of this unborn child, Connor, as, in fact, a murder in and of itself. So it does affect how the prosecution goes about the case. Again, they can't get a conviction without evidence of how Laci Peterson died. But right now, what they have their forensic experts working around the clock, it's just that -- that question.
COOPER: You say, the prosecution has been floating some of the evidence in public -- in a sort of a public forum. Defense -- we really have not seen that. I think there are three public defenders who are representing Scott Peterson. Do you think that's a problem that something they are going to have to start doing?
PIXLEY: They're way behind the prosecution right now, and it is a major problem for them. Obviously, we've had the changing of the guard, Scott Peterson going from having private council to just this week making an announcement that he would, in fact, be seeking state appointed public defender. And that means the public defenders office now has to play catch up. And in order for them to do that effectively, the way this case is being handled in the court of public opinion, they have got to get out of there, they have to find witnesses...
COOPER: Why -- I mean, you know, some might just say: Look, that thing is going to be decided in the courtroom, why do you have to appeal to the media, why do you have to, you know, show up on some talk show somewhere?
PIXLEY: Well, you don't have to do that. But the fact of the matter is in the 21st century today, we are having these cases tried long before they are ever seeing the inside of courtroom. And right now, Scott Peterson's public image is taking a battery. We need to reverse -- I should say that -- the defense council -- really needs to get out there and do some damage control. And that means reversing and softening the public perception of Peterson.
COOPER: All because those potential jurors are going to be influenced by what's being talked about in the public right now?
PIXLEY: It's exactly right.
COOPER: Well, that's kind of a cynical view of the whole process. I mean that, you know, you can't just get 12 people to sort of disassociate themselves from what they learned before.
PIXLEY: Well, you remember, in 1992 there was a transfer of the Rodney King case from Los Angeles County to Simmi (ph) Valley on the believe that you couldn't get jurors in an area where all the publicity and where, in fact, the event has occurred to give a fair hearing. Now, of course, in this case there has been so much media attention nationally that the concern for defense has got to be, if we don't make some statement on Scott Peterson's behalf now -- by the time we get to trial -- 12 to 18 months from now, even 24 months from now, possibly -- they won't have any chance.
COOPER: If you were representing Scott Peterson, we've got to go, but would you recommend the change of venue?
PIXLEY: I don't think he'll get a change of venue. Again, so much national attention has been given to this case -- it's not likely that there is a place outside of Modesto that would be more fair than Modesto.
COOPER: All right, Chris Pixley, I appreciate your joining us. Thanks.
PIXLEY: Thanks.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
