Return to Transcripts main page

American Morning

Analysis of Trials of Snipers, Scott Peterson

Aired November 14, 2003 - 07:15   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.


ANDERSON COOPER, CNN ANCHOR: For a perspective on developments in the sniper trials, as well as the latest in the Scott Peterson murder case, we're joined by CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin.
Jeff -- good morning.

JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Hi.

COOPER: Let's talk about the sniper trial. Yesterday, this odd juxtapositioning, you have the Malvo opening arguments, the Muhammad closing arguments.

TOOBIN: Very different cases. And the Malvo case is such a more defensible case, because, you know, he was a teenager when this took place. He is clearly someone the jury might say, look, he was under the influence of Muhammad. At least if it comes to the death penalty portion of the case, he really might have some arguments the jury might latch on to. But Muhammad, it's just -- you know, it is not for nothing that there were 130 witnesses for the prosecution and only 5 for the defense. It is an almost impossible case to defend.

COOPER: And the defense really hammered that home yesterday with the opening arguments for Malvo, basically saying, look, he was, you know, a young, 110-pound, 5 foot 10, I think, you know, young man when he met Muhammad.

TOOBIN: Muhammad controlled what he ate. Muhammad controlled what he saw, where he slept, what he did. That is an argument the jurors might be able to latch on to, especially if it comes to a penalty phase.

COOPER: It's going to be interesting to see.

Let's change tracks a little bit and talk about the Peterson case. Yesterday, we learned Amber Frey will not be testifying in this point of the phase. Why?

TOOBIN: A very sensible decision by the prosecution. One of the things as a prosecutor you always want to do is avoid creating transcripts with your witnesses that they can later be cross-examined on. In a preliminary hearing in California, hearsay evidence is admissible. So, the detectives who interviewed Amber Frey have already testified about what she said. Anything that the prosecution wants of her testimony is already before the judge. Amber Frey herself doesn't need to testify. It would just be a show. It would just be a big spectacle. Better get the information you want and only expose her to cross-examination once... COOPER: But she is likely to...

TOOBIN: ... at the trial.

COOPER: Right. And she is likely to testify at the trial.

TOOBIN: Oh, I think in front of a jury, you're going to need to...

COOPER: It's a whole different story.

TOOBIN: Absolutely. You're going to need to tell a story. You always need to tell a story to a jury. And the fact that Scott was having this affair with her gives the prosecutors a sense of motive...

COOPER: Right.

TOOBIN: ... also his lies to her about whether he was a widow or not. All that stuff will be good in front of a jury.

COOPER: Let's talk a little bit about how Mark Geragos is doing. Yesterday there was this testimony, this revelation that Scott Peterson went to the marina some three times over the course of several days, at one point took evasive action from police, two times I believe got out of his car, sort of stared out at the waters. How significant was that? And was Geragos able to punch any holes in that?

TOOBIN: Well, I mean, it is bizarre behavior to go to this place where you claim you were on the day she was murdered and to look and see if her body's turned up, although Geragos did have a point. He said the day before that she -- the day before he went on these first of these trips, the police -- I'm sorry -- the day before the newspaper reporter, the "Modesto Bee" that they were going to be looking for her body there. So, he could say all he was doing was trying to be there when his wife's body might have been discovered, like so much evidence in this case, circumstantial and susceptible to different interpretations depending on what you're attitude is toward Scott Peterson.

COOPER: All right, Jeff Toobin, thanks very much.

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 November 14, 2003 - 07:15   ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
ANDERSON COOPER, CNN ANCHOR: For a perspective on developments in the sniper trials, as well as the latest in the Scott Peterson murder case, we're joined by CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin.
Jeff -- good morning.

JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Hi.

COOPER: Let's talk about the sniper trial. Yesterday, this odd juxtapositioning, you have the Malvo opening arguments, the Muhammad closing arguments.

TOOBIN: Very different cases. And the Malvo case is such a more defensible case, because, you know, he was a teenager when this took place. He is clearly someone the jury might say, look, he was under the influence of Muhammad. At least if it comes to the death penalty portion of the case, he really might have some arguments the jury might latch on to. But Muhammad, it's just -- you know, it is not for nothing that there were 130 witnesses for the prosecution and only 5 for the defense. It is an almost impossible case to defend.

COOPER: And the defense really hammered that home yesterday with the opening arguments for Malvo, basically saying, look, he was, you know, a young, 110-pound, 5 foot 10, I think, you know, young man when he met Muhammad.

TOOBIN: Muhammad controlled what he ate. Muhammad controlled what he saw, where he slept, what he did. That is an argument the jurors might be able to latch on to, especially if it comes to a penalty phase.

COOPER: It's going to be interesting to see.

Let's change tracks a little bit and talk about the Peterson case. Yesterday, we learned Amber Frey will not be testifying in this point of the phase. Why?

TOOBIN: A very sensible decision by the prosecution. One of the things as a prosecutor you always want to do is avoid creating transcripts with your witnesses that they can later be cross-examined on. In a preliminary hearing in California, hearsay evidence is admissible. So, the detectives who interviewed Amber Frey have already testified about what she said. Anything that the prosecution wants of her testimony is already before the judge. Amber Frey herself doesn't need to testify. It would just be a show. It would just be a big spectacle. Better get the information you want and only expose her to cross-examination once... COOPER: But she is likely to...

TOOBIN: ... at the trial.

COOPER: Right. And she is likely to testify at the trial.

TOOBIN: Oh, I think in front of a jury, you're going to need to...

COOPER: It's a whole different story.

TOOBIN: Absolutely. You're going to need to tell a story. You always need to tell a story to a jury. And the fact that Scott was having this affair with her gives the prosecutors a sense of motive...

COOPER: Right.

TOOBIN: ... also his lies to her about whether he was a widow or not. All that stuff will be good in front of a jury.

COOPER: Let's talk a little bit about how Mark Geragos is doing. Yesterday there was this testimony, this revelation that Scott Peterson went to the marina some three times over the course of several days, at one point took evasive action from police, two times I believe got out of his car, sort of stared out at the waters. How significant was that? And was Geragos able to punch any holes in that?

TOOBIN: Well, I mean, it is bizarre behavior to go to this place where you claim you were on the day she was murdered and to look and see if her body's turned up, although Geragos did have a point. He said the day before that she -- the day before he went on these first of these trips, the police -- I'm sorry -- the day before the newspaper reporter, the "Modesto Bee" that they were going to be looking for her body there. So, he could say all he was doing was trying to be there when his wife's body might have been discovered, like so much evidence in this case, circumstantial and susceptible to different interpretations depending on what you're attitude is toward Scott Peterson.

COOPER: All right, Jeff Toobin, thanks very much.

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