Wednesday, March 6, 2013

Statement Analysis: Scott Peterson Interview

Last night on Crime Wire, Analyst Kaaryn Gough said that even though Mark Redwine is attempting to be deceptive, he is choosing words from his brain, which knows the truth.  This is what we call "leakage" in Statement Analysis.  An example of this will be found in exerts from Scott Peterson's interviews. 

Here is some of Scott Peterson interviews, 2003.  Statement Analysis is in bold type, with underlining, color and italics added for emphasis.  Scott Peterson is currently on Death Row for the killing of his wife, Laci Peterson, and his pre-born child, Connor.  No statements of Peterson, nor of a question asked has been edited. 

LARRY KING, HOST: Tonight, is Scott Peterson telling all? 

Now, with his missing wife's baby due in less than two weeks, Laci Peterson's husband admits he lied about his extramarital with affair with Amber Frey. Laci's family wants him to answer more questions and police have not ruled him out of the investigation. 

Let's get into it. The big story of the day, of course, is the missing Mrs. Peterson. The baby due shortly, in two weeks. Scott Peterson appeared on "Good Morning America" earlier today. He was asked about how he told his wife about his affair. Watch. 


S. PETERSON: I told my wife. 


S. PETERSON: In early December. 

SAWYER: Did it cause a rupture in the marriage? 

S. PETERSON: It was not a positive, obviously. It was, you know, inappropriate. But it was not something that we weren't dealing with. 

Note what is reported in the negative (twice).
When using the word "inappropriate", he drops any pronoun, distancing himself from it.  What is inappropriate?  He does not say. 
SAWYER: A lot of arguing? 



KING: Nancy Grace, is he in an impossible position? 

NANCY GRACE, FMR. PROSECUTOR: Well No. 1 rule, when you're in a hole, Larry, stop digging. And I think to suggest to ordinary people like myself that his wife was -- and I'm quoting -- OK with it that he was having an affair -- that he was having that affair after he told his wife he continued the affair, no, I don't think anybody in their right mind would think that as Laci Peterson was picking out material to decorate her baby's room that she was OK with it. I think that's a glaring lie. 

KING: Mark Geragos, is this the kind of case where supposing he'd never had anything do with her disappearance, where he's between a rock and a hard place? 

MARK GERAGOS, DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Well, that's a given. And I hate to say it, but I do agree with Nancy. 

For anybody who's ever been married and been around a pregnant wife, the idea of coming home in her seventh month of pregnancy, and telling her, by the way, Honey, you may not feel all that great, I'm having an affair, but let's go on with it. 

GRACE: And I'm not stopping! 

GERAGOS: I just have a lot of problems with that. I can't imagine that. 

KING: But it doesn't mean he took her.

GERAGOS: No, I'm just -- I'm just I'm saying I don't know that's a place I'd want to be -- not only in that room or in that state. 

The guests dig to the root of his selfishness and motive. 


S. PETERSON: Driving along the highway for no reason, I was just smiling the biggest smile. And she asked me, What the heck are you smiling about? You know, the thing was that she was there. 

SAWYER: What kind of marriage was it? 

S. PETERSON: God, the first word that comes to mind is, you know, glorious. I mean, we took care of each other very well. She's amazing. Is amazing. 

In listening to this, it sounded like "she was amazing" and then he corrected himself to "is"
Note, in any case, hyperbole in relationships is generally a very bad sign. 

KING: Dr. Michael Welner is associate professor of psychiatry at New York University School of Medicine. He's chairman of the Forensic Panel, has consulted for the defense and the prosecution in more than 20 states. He's a developer of the depravity scale, an effort to provide a standard forensic definition of evil.

What's your read from afar of Mr. Peterson? 

MICHAEL WELNER, M.D., FORENSIC PSYCHIATRIST: You know, one thing you learn after you do this for a while is that with all of the experience and expertise you have, you can't tell when someone is lying or when someone is telling the truth, but you can tell that invariably, when they're on the hot seat, they will be self-serving. 

And he's in a setting, a television interview, which is very much like what I see in my experience of people being interviewed by defense-retained psychiatrists, sometimes I'm one of them, where a person puts his best foot forward, says things which are obviously contradictory, which are going to dig a deeper hole for himself but his priority is to look as good as he can, even if it means saying things that later on we will find absurd. 

KING: Nancy Grace, do the authorities need a corpse or a person? Do they need a victim? 

GRACE: No, they really do not, Larry. Of course, optimally, when you're trying to go forward with an investigation like this, you want that hard evidence. 

But, as we all know, evidence was taken from the home, the car and the boat, the office as well and it was sent to the local crime lab, an arm of the Department of Justice. It was sent not just to the crime lab, Larry, but to the serology unit. That means one of three things: saliva, blood or sperm. 

And then we heard Peterson give some theory about how likely it was that her and his blood could be found in the vehicles. I did not buy into that. I don't think that that's normal. 

KING: Do you think, Mark, that the state can build a case here without anything beyond what they have to this minute from what you know they have? 

GERAGOS: Just from what I know, no. 

But then again, you know, they have -- the police have engaged in kind of a whisper campaign, if you will, with the local media and there seems to be -- they seem to be fairly confident they have something and they clearly are focused on him. 

As Marc Klaas was mentioning, either they suspected that he was having an affair immediately or they heard it from Amber, because they immediately wanted to follow-up, see where it was he went, they dredged that marina. They knew or believed that they've got something on him. 

KING: But based solely on the fact he was having an affair? 

GERAGOS: Well, it's -- one of the kind of age-old theories that police will employ any time there is a husband and a wife is if the husband is cheating on the wife, that they believe that this love triangle, if you will, that that will end up in somebody being missing. So it's not unnatural theory. I think it's something that makes some degree of sense. Whether there's evidence to support it is a completely different question. 

KING: Ted Rowlands, the reporter for KTVU-TV has joined us now from Modesto. In fact, we understand Ted just did his report for his local situation. 

You're standing in front of Scott Peterson's house, right, Ted? 

TED ROWLANDS, KTVU REPORTER: Yes, that's right, Larry. This is where we did the interview today. 

KING: You interviewed him what time today? 

ROWLANDS: At 11:00 we went in; he invited us into his home. We were restricted, though, to just one room, which was adjacent to the door that we entered. So we really didn't get a good feel for the entire home, and he was really running the show. You know, take your shoes off when you get in and no shots of the house and he was selective in some of the questions that he would not answer. 

KING: How long have you been talking to him? 

ROWLANDS: Off and on, since this case broke, since his wife disappeared. In recent weeks, pretty much every day a couple times a day. The communication between the two of us has been constant. 

He doesn't give a lot of information. When you push this guy for specifics, he'll get off the phone pretty quick. He knows when to stop talking. 

KING: There are, I understand, we're showing scenes of Scott in front of his house, angry with police and the like, protesters in front of the house? 

ROWLANDS: Yes, I tell you, you know, he decided to do a couple interviews today and of course, the Diane Sawyer interview. What that did was attract a lot of media and specifically a radio station came up here from the L.A. area, a guy with a bullhorn, he was barking out that he was going pay Scott $60, 000 to take a lie detector test. That brought out neighbors. Scott eventually called police. 

KING: Ah, the genius of radio guys. 

I'm going to take a break and come back with more while our whole panel is assembled. We will be including your phone calls. 

Don't go away. 


S. PETERSON: I had nothing to do with Laci's disappearance. Even if think I did, think about Laci. And I know that there's a nation that wants to bring her home to our families. 

He does not issue a reliable denial, but allows for people to think he did, with the words "think I did" used. 

Notice how he now says to bring her home to "our" families rather than the personal, "me."  This use of the plural is the same as Mark Redwine 

OK. So you can think what you want of me. You can question my moral character, question how I've acted, if it's been smart, if it hasn't been. Obviously I'm not media savvy, so I've made some mistakes. 

He allows the audience to think him guilty, and he allows for his moral character to be questioned, yet he does not blame his failures, he blames it on the media:  he is not media savvy.  

He is a savvy liar and changes the focus.  Sound familiar?


KING: By the way, I'll continue asking some question of Ted Rowlands and maybe the panel members would like to ask him some questions, too since of all of us he's the one that knows Scott. How would you describe his emotions?

ROWLANDS: Well, he's a pretty reserved guy. Today he was emotional a few times with us when he was talking about Laci specifically and his unborn son, Conner. For the most part he kept it together. 

Actually he addressed it saying that he is forcing himself to keep it together because he says there's a level that you could drop to which you can't get out of and he doesn't want to get to that level. 

As you saw in the "Good Morning America" interview he was emotional there especially with his family around him.

KING: I spoke to him today on the phone. He appeared to be unhappy with the way they edited that interview. Did he express that to you?

ROWLANDS: He was talking specifically about some video that he was unhappy about that we are -- that our station used as a tease during the noon show. It's an example although he says he's not media savvy he sure is keeping very close tabs of it. We literally came out of the interview about 11:30, I got a phone call at 1:00 and he was expressing displeasure over some veal (ph) used, just a couple shots of him. He was watching.

KING: Mark Geragos?

GERAGOS: I was just going -- how much of -- is his lawyer involved in any of this? Is his lawyer orchestrating this media campaign? Is he doing it? Is Scott doing it himself? Was the lawyer present in the house?

ROWLANDS: The only comment we've heard from his lawyer in this entire investigation is -- was a couple of days ago. The lawyer said, I'm instructing Scott not do any interviews. 

Shortly after that, Scott agreed to these selective interviews. Today when he would say, I can't talk about that, he didn't reference his lawyer, he referenced his investigator. He's hired a private investigator and he also said that the Modesto Police Department didn't want him talking about specific issues, which may or may not be true, of course.

KING: Doctor Welner, do you have a question for Ted Rowlands?

WELNER: I do. I have a couple of questions perhaps you might be able to help as far as your familiarity with the investigation. Do you know if police have made use of the dog at all in being able to track where the body might be because the dog may respond to a particular part of the park or somewhere where she may have been seized if the dog was found outside the home?

ROWLANDS: Oh, yes. They have -- they used bloodhounds early on in the investigation...

WELNER: No, I mean her dog. I mean her dog.

ROWLANDS: Excuse me?

WELNER: I mean her dog specifically.

ROWLANDS: Oh, her dog, yes, they brought the bloodhounds in first and took her dog out and tried to retrace the steps and they didn't get anywhere with that. They said it was just a walk in the dog with the dog, Mackenzie. But they did try it, yes. WELNER: One more question. To what degree have police been able to follow the steps of this traveling salesman to see what kind of life he was living at his different points of call in his job?

ROWLANDS: Well, they're not releasing a lot of the specifics about their investigation. But the feeling you get interest this department is that they are dedicating a lot of the resources towards Scott Peterson and the investigation, you can only assume, they have tracked him pretty closely in his past.

KING: How did he describe his affair to you, Ted?

ROWLANDS: He said he wanted to address it right away. He said that it was inappropriate, was the word he used. And he was apologetic. He said he owed a lot of people an apology, specifically Laci's family. He said even Amber's family he needs to give them an apology as well. But he didn't get too deep into it.

KING: That noise behind you, what are those people saying?

ROWLANDS: This is a local Modeston with a sign who's upset with the press for capitalizing on tragedy, I guess he's got a sign. I think Gary Condit's on there and Scott Peterson.

KING: Nancy Grace, do you have a question for Ted Rowlands?

GRACE: I do, Larry. Thank you. Ted, two questions. Number one, you told us earlier in the week, last week, that if Scott Peterson had denied any knowledge about the life insurance policies, now he's saying that there were life insurance policies, that they were an investment vehicle. I want to ask you about that. 

And number two, you just told Larry King that he refused to answer certain questions when you were allowed into the home. Which questions did Peterson want to avoid?

ROWLANDS: Well, first off on the life insurance he told me he that didn't just take a life insurance policy out on Laci. He clarified it saying that he had a life insurance -- a policy out on the both of them for $250,000. 

As to what questions he didn't want to answer today, specifically it was interesting, he didn't want to answer the question as to whether or not he told police about his affair with Amber on the day that Laci disappeared. 

He told Diane Sawyer that in that interview and it raised a lot of eyebrows that the point. And I tried to clarify it with him and he said he didn't want to talk about that and that he shouldn't been talking about it in that interview. I know that ABC today reported that Modesto Police said that was incorrect.

GERAGOS: His lawyer's probably jumping him like you can't even believe. For him to be out there and feeding that to the press...

(CROSSTALK) KING: Let's -- I want to show you a clip of Ted Rowlands' interview earlier today with Scott Peterson talking about the nursery plan for the baby. Watch.


S. PETERSON: I told her as (UNINTELLIGIBLE) as I can, look, you know...

ROWLANDS: You worked on it? What was the sort of preparation did you do?

S. PETERSON: Yes. (UNINTELLIGIBLE) the furniture's there. It's painted and it's ready. All the little itty bitty clothes and all of the wonderful things we have.


KING: Now he seems very believable, quite sad, quite taken. Whey doesn't that help?

GERAGOS: He is. But the problem is, and he could be stone cold innocent, and that may be the case. 

But what good did he do by going on, getting himself edited every which way and not going on to a live show, and I'm not plugging for him to do the interview here, if he was going to talk, do it in a live show where he's not edited? 

And number two, what is he doing disobeying his lawyer, if you will, and starting to talk about what he did or didn't tell the police when the police are denying that's the case? He's going to walk himself...


KING: ... if he doesn't go on they're saying what is he afraid of? Why's he afraid to go on?

GERAGOS: Exactly. In that situation, you what tell the guy is you're between a rock and a hard place. You go talk to the police, if you want to talk, you're going talk to the police and you're going to tell them the truth. 

Otherwise I'm shutting you down, you're going to get fired as a client. You're not going to just go out there and walk yourself in. You could be innocent of one thing and end up getting a false statements to a police on you.

KING: We'll be back with more in a minute. We'll be taking your calls at the bottom of the hour. And we'll try to see what we can do about some belligerent guy out there in front of that house. Don't go away.



SHARON ROCHA, LACI PETERSON'S MOTHER: And I miss everything about her. Someone has taken all of this away from me and every one else who loves her. There are no words that can possibly describe the ache in my heart or the emptiness in my life. I know that someone knows where Laci is and I'm pleading with you, please, please, let her come home to us. 


KING: That was last Friday, the emotional press conference. Sharon Rocha, the mother of Laci Peterson. 

Marc Klaas, do you have a question for Ted Rowlands? 

KLAAS: Yes I do, Larry. Thank you. Thank you very much. 

And I have to say, watching Mrs. Rocha is just one of the most painful things that we'll ever have to do. This is so sad. 

But, Ted, after you took off your shoes and Scott allowed you into a small portion of the house, did he spend any time show you pictures of Laci's or giving you any kind of insight into their life together or otherwise trying to humanize her? 

And I only say that because that was totally our goal or my goal when I went on TV. I know the van Dams have followed suit. So many people have.

But this guy just seems so terribly self-centered that it always comes -- sort of collapses back on to being about him. 

ROWLANDS: Yes, you know, we asked him, Marc, to take a couple shots of the nursery or even just the door of the nursery that he says remains closed. He said, No. We asked him if we could take a shot of the unopened Christmas presents. No, we were told to just stay in that living room. 

I asked him about you specifically. I said, you know, people like Marc Klaas, John Walsh, people that have been through this have a different fire in their belly and they say they're willing to do anything to clear themselves and it's been a month now. Why aren't you doing that? And he just gave sort of a nonspecific response to it. 

But, Yes, you're right. I mean, it's very bizarre. He -- he's got certain things he doesn't want you to do and don't know the reason. 

KING: Dr. Welner, what do you make of all of this? 

WELNER: Well, you know, I can't help but be reminded of a case that I was once involved in as a prosecution witness where it seemed like a gentleman who had killed his wife but had had some emotional problems but we dug and we dug a little more and then we dug a little more, and when we were done digging we found he had a life of 30-year secret homosexuality that no one knew about. 

So what I make of it is, that there's always much more than one can account for. And that's not necessarily to indict Mr. Peterson. But I can say clearly he distinguishes himself by, as Marc Klaas says, being very self-absorbed, being very detached. Reminds me of a case of a Mr. Witherer, in Pittsburgh, a very highly -- high-profile case of a guy who lost his wife and right after the funeral he went out bowling. And so -- and he was acquitted, I might add. 

And so I think that we have to be careful about the idea of pressuring the police into making an arrest before they feel they have the requisite evidence. 

KING: Nancy Grace, is the prosecutor interested yet or the prosecution disinterested until an arrest is made? 

GRACE: Oh, Larry, they are so interested and I guarantee you that they are overseeing warrants and so forth that the police are issuing. 

And as far as someone rushing police to make an rest, I disagree with that. I would not rush police. I don't want a half-baked case to put in front of a jury. 

But back to what Ted Rowlands said, Larry, I find it highly unusual when you should be out, by all accounts, looking for your wife, you're on the phone with the TV station going, Hey, you know, I don't like that clip you're showing of me. It really doesn't make me look too good. 

You know what? That is very, very unusual, Larry, by all accounts. I don't think even Mark Geragos would disagree with that. 

KING: But couldn't that mean, Mark, the fact that it's so unusual, that that's just the way he is? 

In other words, the guy who went bowling was found not guilty. Maybe that's just the way he is. It don't look good, but it don't mean he did it. 

GERAGOS: One thing I've seen, and I think Dr. Welner's probably experienced the same thing -- there is no set way that either innocent or guilty people act. 

GRACE: Please, not that again! 

GERAGOS: I'm telling you right now, you have to... 

GRACE: You always say that! 

GERAGOS: There is no set way that they act. 

GRACE: Yes, there is. 

GERAGOS: You can't look on the TV screen and decide this person's innocence or guilty. GRACE: Normally people act upset. 

GERAGOS: Well, acting upset -- different people have different ways of man manifesting that. It's just -- it's that simple.

GRACE: You know what Mark?

GERGAOS: Most people don't know how to act.

GRACE: You know what Mark?

GRACE: A lot of people are shell shocked. 

GRACE: You know his undoing, one of them, was the photo that he had of him with Amber Frey. He was just telling Diane Sawyer how much he loved the little baby in the nursery. But that photo was taken on a night he was supposed to be at a function with Laci Peterson, his pregnant wife... 


GERAGOS: Just because he's a narcissist doesn't mean that this guy's a murderer. 

KING: We have a clip, by the by way, of Ted asking Scott today about the blood in his truck. Watch. 


S. PETERSON: I'm afraid, you know, men -- we cut each other and we bleed. So yes, that's in there. 

This is an example of what Kaaryn Gough said recently about Mark Redwine:  the brain knows the truth and the words chosen reveal that truth.  Note here he comes close to an admission.  

ROWLANDS: And Laci's, too? 

S. PETERSON: I don't know. I mean, I would assume so.

He assumes so, therefore, we can assume so as well.  
The brain knows the truth and wants to say it, while the conflict emerges that the subject wants to be deceptive.  

Even in deception, he chooses words that reveal what happened. 


BRENT ROCHA, LACI PETERSON'S BROTHER: Laci, the last month has been the most disturbing time of my life. Your disappearance has completely changed my life as I once knew it. I miss your beautiful smile and your fun-loving personality. Every time we were together I could fee the unconditional love between the both of us. As your older brother, I only wish that I had the opportunity to be there to defend you from the person that decided to take you away from me. 


And we'll go to your calls. 

Rockland, California, hello. 

CALLER: Yes, hello, Larry. This question is for Ted. Nancy touched on it earlier. Do you think -- why do you think that $250,000 life insurance policy was taken out at the time it was? 

ROLLINS: Well, Scott says that he took out the life insurance policy along with the policy out on himself when he purchased his home here in Modesto about that same time. I guess at that same time, they had some money in investment plans. And he said it was just that an investment vehicle. And he laughed about it today. 

See Baby Ayla and Justin DiPietro taking out a life insurance policy against her, along with himself.  Shortly after, Ayla 'disappeared.'

Quite frankly I don't put a lot of credence into that as being the motive either. The number it's not that large of a life insurance policy. He would have to be an idiot to think that he could cash in on it, you know, after murdering his wife. So -- it really -- honestly I don't think that that could be a possible motive if he has anything to do with this. 

KING: Edmonton, Alberta Canada, hello. 

CALLER: My question would be I find it interesting that when -- my question would be, I find it interesting that when Mr. Peterson said that he told his wife mid-December, sometime in December, that he was having an affair, I'm wondering why -- I fine it interesting that none of her friends, family or colleagues ever mentioned to the police that she stated that he was having an affair. I find that very bizarre. And that his girlfriend was the only one that really came forth with affair. Now I think that he could possibly be using that now that the affair's out in the open as an alibi that maybe she left him or maybe she couldn't handle it. 

KING: What do you read on that, Mark. 

GERAGOS: Well, it's interesting. The police are saying he didn't tell them about the affair. The family has said, her family has said that they asked him whether he was having an affair. And then the police apparently focused in on him prior to Amber coming forward. The caller's question is great. Because I think it might mean that she did in fact mention something to the family. That's one of the reasons they asked him, were you having an affair. 

KING: Why were they covering it up? 

GERAGOS: That's entirely possible. We just don't know because we don't know what the police actually have. 

KING: Funny, I hear Mark saying something. I know Nancy is saying the opposite. 

ROLLINS: Listen, go ahead, Nancy. 

GRACE: OK. You know, Larry, right here on your show, a couple of weeks ago the family was asked, her family and his family was there when it happened did they have a happy marriage, was there any problems? They all went, nope, no problems. They knew nothing. In fact, they were devastated when they found out about this affair. In fact, Laci's friends have come forward and given statements that they knew nothing about an affair. So I think the BSO-meter is way off the chart on this one. He didn't tell his wife about that and she was OK with it. 

GERAGOS: The BSO-meter, that's a new scientific devices that used. 

GRACE: Common sense. 

KLAAS: Furthermore, the family withdrew their support after they found out about affair. They weren't led into anything here. I'm absolutely stunned that Mrs. Rocha or her sister or one of her girlfriends had absolutely no inkling that something like this was going on. 

GERAGOS: Except they did have some. 


GERAGOS: Somebody had an inkling because somebody asked him. I mean, the fact is, the family says they asked him, were you having an affair. So they did have some inkling that had to come out of somewhere. I don't think the natural first question you ask the husband and the father-to-be when the wife goes missing is, were you sleeping with somebody else? That doesn't seem to be a logical first question. WELNER: One other thing here. As long as we're looking at Scott and what he's doing I think we have to look at his pattern of communicating publicly about this. He says what he needs to say, and he doesn't say what he doesn't need to say and there's no compelling reason for him to have to tell his pregnant wife about this. 

And so taking this in with him as the only informant I just find it dubious to begin with they ever had that kind of conversation. It sounds good for our consumption now and again, that fits his pattern of communication with the public about presenting things in a self- serving light that may reflect well on him. 

KING: Wilmington, Delaware, hello. 

CALLER: My question is for Dr. Welner. At the beginning of the show you played a clip of the interview with Scott Peterson and he is describing Laci and he says, that's just the way she was. And then he immediately corrects himself and says is. Every time I hear her family talk about her talk about her in the present tense. Could this be con construed of him knowing and she's dead or alive or is this just a normal thing? 

Caller recognizes Statement Analysis 

KING: Good observation. He did say "was" doctor. 

WELNER: You know a former profiler, one of the first to call attention to this. And Marc, astutely pointed out you cannot deconstruct where people are coming from culturally, where people are coming from personally in terms of their willingness to accept that someone is gone. There's only so much that one can read. It's certainly doesn't reflect well on him. But that's about as far as I, personally, based on my own experience of listening to suspects, would go. 

Welner does not.  Marc was wrong too. 

GRACE: Doctor, ever heard the phrase a slip of the tongue? Because early on in this investigation he was giving one of his very rare interviews, and he had already immediately began referring to Laci in the past tense. He said something along the lines of, oh, we worked so hard on this nursery. Now she'll never be able to enjoy it. That was at the get-go. He was...

WELNER: Nancy, Nancy, as -- Nancy, prosecutors like you taught me not to commit too much to a slip of the tongue or you'd hammer me on cross-examination. 

GRACE: Well that may be true, but a jury may think otherwise. I'm tell you guys, after seeing the family at that press conference, I watched it live, Larry. I'm just burning up the way they have been misled by Scott Peterson, and then the self-serving interview with Diane Sawyer. I mean, I'm just burning up over the whole thing. 

GERAGOS: But the fact of the matter is is that you can't just say that this slip of the tongue means that he's guilty or he may be guilty. 


GRACE: Several slip of the tongues. GERAGOS: He also may have already come to the kind of acceptance in his own mind that it's not logical that she's hiding somewhere, and that some foul play is involved. I mean, if I were to ask you, you would admit that you don't think she's alive. And so maybe in his own mind even hope against hope, he's resolved himself to that. 

GRACE: Maybe. Maybe. 

GERAGOS: That's why she's slipping. 

KING: Tyler, Texas, hello. 

CALLER: Yes, thank you. I'd like to ask if Scott Peterson chose to travel out of state or out of the country if there's anything that would stop him or could stop him? 

KING: Ted Rollins, could he go anywhere he wants? 

ROLLINS: According to the Modesto police department, yes, he could go out of the country. I asked that specific question. They say he's not charged with any crime, he can do whatever he wants. But I would be interested to see what would happen at the Canadian or Mexican border. 

KING: As we go to break, viewers get a shot of Amber Frey, the woman that apparently had the affair with Mr. Peterson. Lucy Peterson -- Laci Peterson is due to give birth in two weeks. We'll be right back on LARRY KING LIVE with more calls. Don't go away. 


AMBER FREY, HAD AFFAIR WITH SCOTT PETERSON: I met Scott Peterson November 20, 2002. I was introduced to him. I was told he was unmarried. Scott told me he was not married. We did have a romantic relationship. When I discovered he was involved in the Laci Peterson disappearance case, I immediately contacted the Modesto police department. 

Note passivity seeks to drop responsibility.  Someone else must be at fault because the unnamed person introduced me and unnamed person told me he was unmarried.  Only after this did Scott tell her he was not married. 



S. PETERSON: I told Laci about the relationship. She knew about it. It's important between us. And we'll continue to search for her and we'll bring her home. 

Note going from "us" to "we'll" shows deception.  Laci is missing at this point, and the use of "we", being plural, comes in context to being with Laci about the affair.  This is inappropriate use of a pronoun, indicating deception.  It is the same pattern that Mark Redwine uses. 


KING: That was Scott Peterson in an interview with another of our affiliates, KOVR. 

By the way, there was a $500,000 reward money out. And for information on the Web site, it's The Modesto police hot line for tips is 209- 342-6166. 

Souderton, Pennsylvania, hello. 

CALLER: Yes, Larry. I really enjoy watching your show. 

KING: Thank you. 

CALLER: The question I have is for Nancy Grace and Mark Geragos, basically. I'm thinking that, could it possibly be that Laci Peterson was involved in a -- her relationship with her husband was of domestic violence and could she have gone underground until she had her baby and, you know, maybe she needed to get away now that we're finding out, you know, she knew about the... 

KING: You think she could be hiding, Mark? 

GERAGOS: Well, you'd hope that because that would be the best- case scenario. 

KING: Best case...

GERAGOS: The problem is, I don't think anybody, as Marc Klaas says, if you take a look at her mother and what she obviously is going through, I don't think that there's any human being could look at their own mother, see her going through all of that and still hide. 

KING: Frankly, the odd are not good, are they, Doctor Welner, that she's alive? 

WELNER: No, the odds aren't good at all. But I do think that the caller's question is very important to this case because in spouse homicide matters we very often see a history of domestic violence and if there is not one in this case, then it certainly raises questions about what would have befallen her, even the idea of a stranger killing her is more unlikely because she would have been attacked when she had a dog, which would made her a poor target for anyone other than Scott. 

KING: Good point. Oklahoma City, hello. 

CALLER: Hello. I have a question for Ted Rowlands. 

KING: Sure. 

CALLER: I was wanting to ask, What did Scott tell you about the neighbors seeing him load a large object in his truck in a blue tarp the morning Laci disappeared? 

ROWLANDS: He said that, indeed, he was loading up two eight-foot in diameter umbrellas, large umbrellas in the back of his truck, on the morning of Christmas Eve, and that he had them wrapped in a blue tarp and that is what the neighbors saw. 

He also confirmed a report. We had heard police found cement at his home and at his warehouse. He says, Yes, I had cement at both spots. I use cement for home construction and other things. So, he said that that's not uncommon. One thing I'd like to add, too, is that Scott Peterson doesn't appear to be like the typical person that maybe has lost his wife and child. But he doesn't appear like the typical guy, either, that could be responsible for this. And you feel that every time you talk to him, including today. You walk away from him and say, Boy, it is hard to fathom that this guy could kill not only his wife but his baby, just you know an 8-month-old baby. 

So, you know, as far as appearance, he doesn't fit either one, I don't think. 

KING: South Lake Tahoe, hello. 

CALLER: Hello. My question is for Ted. 

KING: Go ahead. 

CALLER: Ted, which reason did Scott give for fishing on Christmas Eve rather than preparing and spending time with his wife for Christmas? 

ROWLANDS: He didn't want to get into that really. He said he didn't want to talk about specifics, what he did during the day of Christmas Eve and before and after because of the investigation. So we really didn't, unfortunately, get into the details of that. 

Hindsight has not been kind to some of the guests. 


S. PETERSON: Just because it's the right thing to do and, as you know, when you're not doing the right thing, it just, you know, eats you up, you know. You feel sick to your stomach and you can't function and you have a hard time, you know, looking at someone.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You mentioned it was the right thing to do. But from my understanding is that after you told Laci, you continued to see Amber. Was that also the right thing to do?

S. PETERSON: I saw her, yes. No, no it was not.


S. PETERSON: That is the explanation, it was not the right thing to do.

KING: Vancouver, British Columbia, hello.

CALLER: My question's for Ted. Just wondering if you had any more information on the so-called fishing trip on Christmas Eve.

ROWLANDS: No, just what's been reported is that Scott said he had basically the day off. He had nothing planned during the day and there was no reason to be at home. He said he could either had gone golfing or fishing and he decided to go fishing. He had a new boat that he had just purchased a couple of weeks ago and said he was excited to take it sturgeon fishing in the bay. He had never been sturgeon fishing or never been to the bay in the boat but said he read an article and wanted to try it.

GRACE: I have some information on that, Larry, regarding the sturgeon fishing. I've done some research, that day it was 30 degrees, 7 knots wind and it was raining in the Berkeley Marina. And to fish for sturgeon you've got to have smelt, anchovy, herring or sardines. Unless he had that in the freezer, he had to buy the bait so where's the receipt?

GERAGOS: I'm sure the police asked that and either an answer that satisfies them or that's why they continue to suspect him.

KING: Youngstown, Ohio, hello.

CALLER: This is to any or all of you. Have they done any searching or given any consideration to the possibility that she had been kidnapped for her baby? It's happened in Ohio a few times.

KING: Have you heard of that Dr. Welner? That is a possibility? Kidnapped for the baby?

WELNER: You know, again I think that the caller raises an interesting point, that in a case like this where clearly there isn't an established history of domestic violence you have to be prepared for something that's way outside the paradigm. 

The three most common reasons for a spouse to be involved in his wife's death is morbid jealousy over disputed parent -- who's the father of the unborn child. That's not a factor here. 

Secondly, a fear of abandonment. Clearly she was committed to the marriage in spite of his being portrayed as controlling. 

And thirdly, financial considerations in a desire to escape his life. And if that's the case we're not going to know that until much more investigation is done. 

Now can that relate to possibly some very peculiar stories such as what has been reported in Ohio and elsewhere. Certainly it's possible. And that's why we've got to be patient and let things develop.

KING: Another bite form KOVR on why Laci's family didn't know about the affair.


S. PETERSON: I don't they if she mentioned it to anyone or not. I did see a report in the new, an interview with a friend of ours, Lori, that indicated that she did not believe that I had told Laci. 

Lori also said I know Scott and he had nothing to do with her disappearance. And that statement, to me, is what's relevant because you can, you know, question morals and my poor decision making, that's fine but don't stop looking for Laci. She's out there somewhere, she shouldn't be. She should be with our family.

Note that he enters into another's language;
Note that he says "to me" being relevant, allowing it to be irrelevant to others.  This is relevant. 

KING: East Greenwich, Rhode Island, hello.

CALLER: Good evening, Larry. Good evening to your remarkable panel. What a great crew you are. I have been in the (UNINTELLIGIBLE) for almost 20 years now. And I have a question I'd like to direct to Ted. 

KING: Quickly.

CALLER: Do the Modesto Police, do you have credible information if they are only limiting their search to where he said he went fishing or in surrounding areas?

ROWLANDS: Surrounding areas most definitely. They have searched any area that they think could be a possible dumping ground. They have been out there pretty much every day. They say they continue do that until they are confident they've looked everywhere.

KING: The Web site again is, The Modesto Police hot line for tips is 209- 342-6166. 


Skeptical said...

After reading this post, I am thinking the training of all forensic psychiatrists should include statement analysis.

Foolsfeedonfolly said...

Things that make me go hmm:

Scott's 1st statement-If they had such a "glorious" marriage, why did Scott have an affair that he needed to tell Laci about?

Scott's 3rd statement: "It was notsomething we weren't dealing with."- Of the eight words he chooses, two are negatives(a very highly sensitive statement). A simple and direct, "We were dealing with it/my affair." would be expected. Notice the embedded truth, "...we weren't dealing with[It:the affair]."

Scott's 5th statement- Why would Lacey say "What the heck are you smiling at?"? The additional word "heck" is generally used in a confrontational context when one party is angry. In a non-confrontational setting, a spouse typically says, "What? What are you smiling about?" or simply, "Why are you smiling like that?".

Throughout this, the one and only time Scott takes possession of Laci is in the past with "I told my wife [re:the affair with Amber Frey]." He repeatedly references bringing Laci "home to our families/us", not to him. He never references bringing Baby Connor home or any concern for the baby at all.

Foolsfeedonfolly said...

Just a few more tidbits:

The phrase "bring ________[insert missing person's name] home", in relation to a missing person, always troubles me. When soldiers are killed in combat overseas, we "bring them home". When relatives living away from their homeplace die, family often "brings them home" for burial. The fact that Scott repeatedly referenced "bring Laci home", as opposed to the more desperate find/we need to find/we've got to find Laci, says a lot.

He references the affair, using soft language like "not a positive", "inappropriate",and "Poor decision making". He attempts to garner support and respect by intimating that he felt eaten up with guilt and physically sick, so he "told" Laci about the affair. However, he fails to claim that those were his feelings/reaction by saying "I felt/I was sick...". His language lacks the self-loathing, self-condemning, and crushing guilt of a man cheating on his pregnant wife gone missing. First, there would be the guilt of cheating, followed by cheating on a pregnant wife. Compound that guilt with he "told" her about the affair and she goes missing. At the very least, he should be staggering under the weight. He's not. He doesn't accept responsibility for the affair, nor for how his behavior and choices would hurt Laci. His words betray false humility, insincerity, unrepentance, selfishness, and narcissism. Simply put, he loves himself far too much to condemn himself for the affair, much less Laci's disappearance and murder (much less any concern or emotion for Baby Connor at all).

Scott, on the blood in his truck, said, "...we cut each other...". Is that the expected? Is the norm for people to "cut each other"? Maybe there was a struggle between Scott and Laci and both were cut in the process. Perhaps in her attempt to deflect stabs, it caused him to get cut in the process. A normal pregnant woman is going to defend her baby, unless she's incapacitated via drugging.

All of Scott's focus in this is on "Look what I've done to make it right (trouble over the affair). I _______.", as opposed to "Look at the damage I've done to Laci and our marriage, and now she's missing and I need her back!". Or the more expected (given the affair situation), "I'd confessed the affair and we were just starting to work through the issues in our marriage and how I failed her. I need my wife back! Please, help me find my wife/Laci!".

Scott's final remark contains a very confident truth. He knows it because he killed her and dumped her. "She's out there somewhere she shouldn't be."

Trigger said...

A pregnant woman in her last trimester, who learns that her husband is having an affair with a single woman, is not going to be comforted easily.

Scott wants viewers to believe that Laci was not distressed by knowledge of his affair (Yea, right).

All Scott had to do was slap her around and she would come to her senses and "deal with it" and "move on."

If that didn't work then he could put his hands on her neck and choke the breath out of her.

This is Scott's idea of how they were dealing with the affair and moving on. Scott lives and Laci dies.

Trigger said...

It is interesting to me that Scott said that he went fishing when Laci went missing. Laci and Conner's bodies were found in water.

Mark Redwine mentions that Dylan's fishing pole was missing, implying that Dylan went fishing. Will Dylan be found in water, where the police are searching?

Eliza said...

Interesting thought, Trigger! I wouldn't be surprised if Dylan was found in water.

About the Peterson case, I look forward to analysis of more Scott interviews. As we know he was guilty, it is interesting to see how he expressed himself during thw interviews.

~ABC said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Mike Dammann said...

Had he had a dream team of lawyers, he would not have been convicted on circumstantial evidence. No matter how damning. The jury selection was poor, especially with the one woman not giving honest answers about her past of being stalked while pregnant.

There was a burglary across the street from them that day. What are the odds of that happening?

Not matter how obvious the case may have been to most, the lawyer was asleep at the wheel. He could have raised enough reasonable doubt that Laci might have noticed the burglary, went to see what is going on and been taken into their van and driven away. He could have suggested that they had the dead body in the van for a while and decided to drop the body in the ocean region where Scott said he was fishing when hearing his words on TV.

Of course, especially after reading the analysis of his statements, that is not what I believe to have happened. But I still believe that it is quite alarming when you see how difference in litigation creates such discrepancies in whether or not justice is served. And most of all: HOW it is served.

Unknown said...

Coming from a family of lawyers, I am always in shock when realizing a conviction could have been avoided. Am very happy with that conviction. But this type of public opinion dominating the outcome can also go very wrong. I definitely believe he was guilty. But where was the beyond reasonable doubt especially considering the burglary next door which left so many legal doors open to raise such.