Return to Transcripts main page

American Morning

Analysis of Laci Peterson Case

Aired May 19, 2003 - 07:17   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.


SOPHIA CHOI, CNN ANCHOR: Police are looking for more clues in the death of Laci Peterson and her unborn son, Connor. After a weekend of searching in San Francisco Bay, police divers will be back in the water today.
Meantime, Scott Peterson's attorney, Mark Geragos, is reportedly considering a satanic twist to try and clear Laci's husband on several murder charges.

Our legal analyst, Jeffrey Toobin, is here to offer his perspective on developments in the Peterson case.

Thanks for being here.

JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Good morning.

CHOI: So, what do you think about this theory that a satanic cult in Modesto or in the San Francisco area might have actually killed Laci and cut the baby out of her tummy?

TOOBIN: We need to be very careful here. This has not been put out on the record. MSNBC has reported that the defense is putting out this theory. I don't know if it's true. Needless to say, we don't know if there is any basis at all.

What's remarkable to me here is that Mark Geragos, the defense attorney, is keeping this story in the news, is putting forth new ideas, when really all he might be better off doing is just lying low for a while and letting this case fade from the headlines. That's not been his strategy. It's a little perplexing to me.

CHOI: What about the reports of this defense team going after police investigators, saying, hey, this is another kind of O.J. Simpson situation, the evidence is tainted, you guys from the get-go had a very narrow perspective going after my client and my client only?

TOOBIN: That makes a lot more sense, because you always -- in any sort of criminal defense you want to challenge the quality of the evidence, the quality of the police work in the case. That makes sense. You know, it remains to be seen whether there is any basis in which to challenge the evidence, but that is a sensible strategy. It's also aimed at the general idea of producing a reasonable doubt, as opposed to putting forth wacky theories that may not pan out when the trial actually happens.

CHOI: Let's talk about the evidence in this case. Since Mark Geragos took over the lead in the defense of Scott Peterson, we've been hearing a little bit of, you know, information here and there. Prior to that, we had no idea what kind of evidence police might be holding. What have you heard about the evidence?

TOOBIN: Well, I mean, the thing that's important to remember about this case, even though Scott Peterson has been convicted around every water cooler in America, this is not an open-and-shut case. It appears there is very little physical evidence tying Scott Peterson to this murder. The cause of death has not been released publicly, as far as we know. There are certainly no eyewitnesses to this murder. That's why they're diving in San Francisco Bay today to try to find some physical evidence, to try to find out how Laci Peterson's body was sunk to the bottom of this lake.

This is not a simple case with an automatic conviction. I obviously don't know how it's going to end, but I think it is worth pointing out that the physical evidence, at least as far as we know, is fairly limited.

CHOI: What's interesting to me is that both the defense and the prosecution do not want the autopsy report released. Why would both teams not want that released?

TOOBIN: Well, I think both teams, at least in public, want to say let's try the case in the courtroom. I think also it's very likely, after all of that time under water, that the autopsy results may be ambiguous anyway. It's just this case should be tried in the courtroom, not in the court of public opinion. But here we are talking about it.

CHOI: Oh, as we are right now. Interesting.

TOOBIN: It's a little bit of a contradiction.

CHOI: Jeffrey, isn't that how you make your living?

TOOBIN: Yes, that's true, I know.

CHOI: All right, Jeffrey, thanks for your insight.

TOOBIN: All right.

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 May 19, 2003 - 07:17   ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
SOPHIA CHOI, CNN ANCHOR: Police are looking for more clues in the death of Laci Peterson and her unborn son, Connor. After a weekend of searching in San Francisco Bay, police divers will be back in the water today.
Meantime, Scott Peterson's attorney, Mark Geragos, is reportedly considering a satanic twist to try and clear Laci's husband on several murder charges.

Our legal analyst, Jeffrey Toobin, is here to offer his perspective on developments in the Peterson case.

Thanks for being here.

JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Good morning.

CHOI: So, what do you think about this theory that a satanic cult in Modesto or in the San Francisco area might have actually killed Laci and cut the baby out of her tummy?

TOOBIN: We need to be very careful here. This has not been put out on the record. MSNBC has reported that the defense is putting out this theory. I don't know if it's true. Needless to say, we don't know if there is any basis at all.

What's remarkable to me here is that Mark Geragos, the defense attorney, is keeping this story in the news, is putting forth new ideas, when really all he might be better off doing is just lying low for a while and letting this case fade from the headlines. That's not been his strategy. It's a little perplexing to me.

CHOI: What about the reports of this defense team going after police investigators, saying, hey, this is another kind of O.J. Simpson situation, the evidence is tainted, you guys from the get-go had a very narrow perspective going after my client and my client only?

TOOBIN: That makes a lot more sense, because you always -- in any sort of criminal defense you want to challenge the quality of the evidence, the quality of the police work in the case. That makes sense. You know, it remains to be seen whether there is any basis in which to challenge the evidence, but that is a sensible strategy. It's also aimed at the general idea of producing a reasonable doubt, as opposed to putting forth wacky theories that may not pan out when the trial actually happens.

CHOI: Let's talk about the evidence in this case. Since Mark Geragos took over the lead in the defense of Scott Peterson, we've been hearing a little bit of, you know, information here and there. Prior to that, we had no idea what kind of evidence police might be holding. What have you heard about the evidence?

TOOBIN: Well, I mean, the thing that's important to remember about this case, even though Scott Peterson has been convicted around every water cooler in America, this is not an open-and-shut case. It appears there is very little physical evidence tying Scott Peterson to this murder. The cause of death has not been released publicly, as far as we know. There are certainly no eyewitnesses to this murder. That's why they're diving in San Francisco Bay today to try to find some physical evidence, to try to find out how Laci Peterson's body was sunk to the bottom of this lake.

This is not a simple case with an automatic conviction. I obviously don't know how it's going to end, but I think it is worth pointing out that the physical evidence, at least as far as we know, is fairly limited.

CHOI: What's interesting to me is that both the defense and the prosecution do not want the autopsy report released. Why would both teams not want that released?

TOOBIN: Well, I think both teams, at least in public, want to say let's try the case in the courtroom. I think also it's very likely, after all of that time under water, that the autopsy results may be ambiguous anyway. It's just this case should be tried in the courtroom, not in the court of public opinion. But here we are talking about it.

CHOI: Oh, as we are right now. Interesting.

TOOBIN: It's a little bit of a contradiction.

CHOI: Jeffrey, isn't that how you make your living?

TOOBIN: Yes, that's true, I know.

CHOI: All right, Jeffrey, thanks for your insight.

TOOBIN: All right.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com.