Laci Peterson's family drops civil suit

[RachelRose]

I'm sorry, I've searched the media, and the Scott Peterson thread below and I can't find when the trial has been rescheduled for.

Last news updates I can find say there would be a court date on July 21 to decide when the trial will begin. But no updates.

Thanks to anyone who has information.

[court~critic1®]

I have searched , and can't find where he is even going to be given a new trial. so you are way ahead of me.



If you find anything please post it here. TIA

[court~critic1®]

Originally posted by RachelRose [*]

Court, it's not a new criminal trial it's the civil trial. He's being sued by the Rochas.

It was originally slated to begin I believe in June, got postponed. [/*]

thanks for the info. I was begining to think I had really lost my mind. lol

[DeeN]

LINK"

http://www.lifenews.com/state3348.html

[DeeN]

http://petersontrial.info/scott-peterson-articles.php

Lots of details in here, also I did not know that Gerago's brother will be defending Peterson for the Civil Trial?

I though it was a female lawyer.

I do wonder who's going to pay to defend him? I guess a court appointed attorney.

[CJMMAMA07]

Have they set a new date?

Is there going to be a Civil Trial?

What the heck is going on?

Any information would be helpful. TIA

http://freehim.proboards57.com

Originally posted by CJMMAMA07 [*]Have they set a new date?

Is there going to be a Civil Trial?

What the heck is going on?

Any information would be helpful. TIA

http://freehim.proboards57.com [/*]

I've been looking for news on this myself. Can't seem to find anything.

I believe the civil trial will be or has been dropped. Remember the judge, in a surprising move, ruled that the plaintiffs could NOT use the guilty verdict as proof of guilt. It would mean a full blown trial to prove him guilty of murdering his wife. Sharon and Dennis Rocha will have to pay for a trial that cost Modesto over 4 million dollars to convict him previously. IMO there will be NO civil trial.

[RayStar]

Originally posted by HI_CYCLE [*]I believe the civil trial will be or has been dropped. Remember the judge, in a surprising move, ruled that the plaintiffs could NOT use the guilty verdict as proof of guilt. It would mean a full blown trial to prove him guilty of murdering his wife. Sharon and Dennis Rocha will have to pay for a trial that cost Modesto over 4 million dollars to convict him previously. IMO there will be NO civil trial. [/*]

Maybe this is best. I do think Sharon would like to something else however.

Originally posted by RayStar [*]Maybe this is best. I do think Sharon would like to something else however. [/*]

RAY, could you explain.

[Justiceguy_1977]

Originally posted by HI_CYCLE [*]I believe the civil trial will be or has been dropped. Remember the judge, in a surprising move, ruled that the plaintiffs could NOT use the guilty verdict as proof of guilt. It would mean a full blown trial to prove him guilty of murdering his wife. Sharon and Dennis Rocha will have to pay for a trial that cost Modesto over 4 million dollars to convict him previously. IMO there will be NO civil trial. [/*]

The Civil lawsuit HAS NOT BEEN DROPPED the trial was POSTONED


PAY for a trial?


they only pay for their attorneys and invesgations thats all..

I've been following some other civil trials and they take forever. The judge often tries to get the partes to agree. So, there are hearings every few months to see how things are going. Not really news.


MOO

[dinojen]

Just read on KTVU..

http://www.ktvu.com/news/19334545/detail.html

Family Drops Wrongful Death Suit Against Scott Peterson

Posted: 11:46 am PDT April 30, 2009
MODESTO, Calif. -- A civil lawsuit filed by the parents of slain Modesto schoolteacher Laci Peterson against her convicted killer – her husband Scott Peterson – has been dropped, court officials said Thursday.

A hearing in the wrongful death lawsuit filed by Sharon and Dennis Rocha was scheduled for Thursday, but a Stanislaus County Superior Court official said the matter was dropped last week.

In his videotaped deposition for the civil trial, Peterson –- who is awaiting execution on San Quentin’s death row -- denied killing Laci Peterson, and asserted his Fifth Amendment right against self incrimination 195 times.

During the taping of that deposition, Scott Peterson also told the family’s attorneys that: "I love my wife… I love my son. I will always love them. I have always loved them. I should be able to hug them right now. I should be able to hold my son."

He also claimed in the deposition that he was the victim of a poorly handled police investigation.

Laci Peterson's parents first filed the lawsuit in 2004, seeking a multimillion-dollar judgment. That same year, a jury found Peterson guilty of murdering her and her fetus and dumping the body into San Francisco Bay on Christmas Eve 2002.

During the ensuing years, the family suffered a major setback when Judge Roger Beauchesne denied a request that Peterson’s death sentence conviction for the murders be allowed in the civil trial as fact.

[KittyMom]

wow...maybe they're just tired of it all.

[dgfred]

Just so he stays exactly where he is... or on a stretcher with tubes and special fluids running into his veins.

[GentleBreeze]

Originally Posted by KittyMom

wow...maybe they're just tired of it all.

He is penniless anyway.

[Tluvr]

Hello, I followed this case.

Hoping they decided to move on.

Justice has been served. Scott P will face his day.

[Hey Paula]

EXCERPT:

The parents of Laci Peterson quietly dropped a wrongful death lawsuit against death row inmate Scott Peterson last week, a court official said, leaving a Stanislaus County Superior Court judge with no reason to call the case that had been scheduled for a hearing this morning.

A trial was slated to begin next month, but Modesto’s most notorious offender would not have been transported from San Quentin State Prison. And even if Scott Peterson’s former in-laws had won a multi-million-dollar judgment, it would have been largely symbolic.

The litigation did not shed much more light on a sensational capital case that ended in guilty verdicts in fall 2004 and sent Scott Peterson, formerly a fertilizer salesman, to death row in spring 2005.

http://www.modbee.com/featured/story/685591.html

[Hey Paula]

EXCERPT:

In his videotaped deposition for the civil trial, Peterson –- who is awaiting execution on San Quentin’s death row -- denied killing Laci Peterson, and asserted his Fifth Amendment right against self incrimination 195 times.

During the taping of that deposition, Scott Peterson also told the family’s attorneys that: "I love my wife… I love my son. I will always love them. I have always loved them. I should be able to hug them right now. I should be able to hold my son."

He also claimed in the deposition that he was the victim of a poorly handled police investigation.

http://www.ktvu.com/news/19334545/detail.html

[Hey Paula]

Originally Posted by grammybear

Sharon does not deserve any more heartache in this horrible case. I understand why they filed the case but maybe it just became to much for her. Of course SP pled the fifth, why would he start telling the truth now all of a sudden after lying for so long.
I feel so bad for Sharon and the rest of her family. No parent deserves to have their adult child die in such a horrific way.

jmoo

ITA!

I think of Sharon often, and of course Laci and Conner too.

[Amy]

Originally Posted by RachelRose

Very interesting move, to wait this long to decide to drop the civil case until after the deposition. I always wondered why they were pursuing this, after the judge said he wouldn't stipulate that Peterson is guilty of killing Laci.

Number One, Scott has nothing at all to give, so they can't recover anything and Number Two, there is a significant chance the second jury will find him not guilty of murder in the guilt phase of the trial, and that will help pave the way for his eventual appeal and perhaps retrial.

I'm kind of surprised an attorney would take this case, since he has nothing to give. There would be no judgement to split between the attorney and the plaintiff even if they won.

He doesn't have anything to give right now. I always tho't the purpose of their civil suit (and that of many other folks, too) was to prevent the defendant from being able to make any money off books, movies and such. If the defendant were to write a book, or get royalties for movies, etc, if there is a judgement against him, HE doesn't get the money, doesn't profit off the death of his victim.

[aproudmom]

Originally Posted by GentleBreeze

He is penniless anyway.

not so sure he has a website his family runs asking for money to free him....he writes blogs and has them add them

[aproudmom]

Originally Posted by RachelRose

OR, frankly, I think they couldn't win another murder trial. Sharon Rocha would be spending her own money in a civil suit, and would have to foot the bill for yet another trial to prove Scott Peterson guilty, and I don't think it could be done. Back in the day when there was the raging crowd of torch bearing townspeople, the court frankly ignored that there was no evidence to prove him guilty. A jury today might notice that.

ok u have got to be kidding me

[aproudmom]

Originally Posted by ATLANTIS

It also wasn't very factual either...
You in love with the guy or something ?
You writing him love letters ?
Not trying to violate the Tos..some women are writing Scott apparently and you sound like you might be one of them...

One of the most guilty perps I have ever seen...

A civil lawsuit wouldn't have accomplished anything..Sometimes those are filed to bring in facts that weren't allowed in the criminal trial..maybe because they didn't meet the burden of proof or maybe because the judge felt they were too prejudicial to the defense.
Some things the Rocha family wanted the public to know about the case.
Something of a moot point now as Scott won't ever get out...nor should he...

ITA but it is a norm..not just here

[aproudmom]

Originally Posted by RachelRose

OR, frankly, I think they couldn't win another murder trial. Sharon Rocha would be spending her own money in a civil suit, and would have to foot the bill for yet another trial to prove Scott Peterson guilty, and I don't think it could be done. Back in the day when there was the raging crowd of torch bearing townspeople, the court frankly ignored that there was no evidence to prove him guilty. A jury today might notice that.

here ya go you can even donate since you feel he is not guilty
http://www.scottpetersonappeal.org/

[aproudmom]

Originally Posted by SlickLime

ITA, RachelRose.

here ya go you can even donate since you feel he is not guilty he sure looks to be doing just fine in the old clicker
http://www.scottpetersonappeal.org/

[starling]

Originally Posted by Hey Paula

EXCERPT:

In his videotaped deposition for the civil trial, Peterson –- who is awaiting execution on San Quentin’s death row -- denied killing Laci Peterson, and asserted his Fifth Amendment right against self incrimination 195 times.

During the taping of that deposition, Scott Peterson also told the family’s attorneys that: "I love my wife… I love my son. I will always love them. I have always loved them. I should be able to hug them right now. I should be able to hold my son."

He also claimed in the deposition that he was the victim of a poorly handled police investigation.

http://www.ktvu.com/news/19334545/detail.html

he also loves Paris & cobblestone streets...what a sociopath waste of space

JMO

[SeaMaiden]

Originally Posted by aproudmom

here ya go you can even donate since you feel he is not guilty
http://www.scottpetersonappeal.org/

Thanks for posting this.

I found Scott's rants on his blog absolutely disgusting. Here's an idiotic sample:
"It is difficult to watch the press & others look to profit off of our loss & our emotions, & sell a story dishonoring my wife & son."

Funny thing, isn't it? He wasn't at all concerned with honoring his pregnant wife when he pretended to be be single, & then pursued Ms. Frey so avidly with champagne & roses.

He's still apparently totally delusional...

IMO

[JohnBJr]

According to this recent article, Peterson is not penniless, thanks to the continuing generousity of his female admirers. And he seems to be adjusting well to the harsh life of death row (he even lost his ocean view of those infamous bay waters). Like most homicidal sociopaths, he readily adapts to any new situation like the pragmatic, flexible, and soulless chameleon that he is. Which of us could handle life on death row with a ghoulish smile?

http://www.people.com/people/article...0.html?cnn=yes

[Leanne Weich]

I, too, think Sharon has probably got to the stage where she can no longer see any point in pursuing the WDS further. Until Scott was deposed and took the 5th, there was still a chance, I guess, that if he'd answered questions, she might have got some more answers to her questions. My brother died in a m.v. accident caused by his gf grabbing the steering wheel and my mom also sued her for wrongful death. As the case dragged on, it really didn't allow my mom to start healing in any meaningful way with the law suit hanging over her head. It got to the point where, for her own sanity, she had to let it go so she withdrew the action. I don't blame Sharon because even if she'd won and somehow Scott had come into money (which I don't see happening), nothing would compensate for her loss. She does, however, have the knowledge that he has probably been worrying about this for a long time now. JMHO.

[kellabeck]

Originally Posted by RachelRose

Very interesting move, to wait this long to decide to drop the civil case until after the deposition. I always wondered why they were pursuing this, after the judge said he wouldn't stipulate that Peterson is guilty of killing Laci.

Number One, Scott has nothing at all to give, so they can't recover anything and Number Two, there is a significant chance the second jury will find him not guilty of murder in the guilt phase of the trial, and that will help pave the way for his eventual appeal and perhaps retrial.

I'm kind of surprised an attorney would take this case, since he has nothing to give. There would be no judgement to split between the attorney and the plaintiff even if they won.

Perhaps the depo was the point after all.

As to your statement which I bolded--- What are you talking about??
1) what "significant chance"??
2) civil juries assess responsibility, not guilt.
3) even if a civil jury were -- on some bizarro planet -- to find him not liable, that would have absolutely no effect on his criminal trial and his conviction and any appeal. NONE.

It was never about money. Another thing you got wrong.

[Lovethechild]

I also followed this case. IMO, Sharon probably filed this suit to see if, by chance, Scott would come clean and she could get some answers. And when that didn't happen, She dropped it. I feel for her. Hopefully, She can find some peace.

[joolz]

Originally Posted by RachelRose

OR, frankly, I think they couldn't win another murder trial. Sharon Rocha would be spending her own money in a civil suit, and would have to foot the bill for yet another trial to prove Scott Peterson guilty, and I don't think it could be done. Back in the day when there was the raging crowd of torch bearing townspeople, the court frankly ignored that there was no evidence to prove him guilty. A jury today might notice that.

Could you provide a link to the torch-bearing townspeople please?

[StarShine]

It was dropped without prejudice, meaning she can bring the suit again if she so chooses in the future. If it was "with prejudice", she would be unable to.

Originally Posted by Hey Paula

EXCERPT:

In his videotaped deposition for the civil trial, Peterson –- who is awaiting execution on San Quentin’s death row -- denied killing Laci Peterson, and asserted his Fifth Amendment right against self incrimination 195 times.

During the taping of that deposition, Scott Peterson also told the family’s attorneys that: "I love my wife… I love my son. I will always love them. I have always loved them. I should be able to hug them right now. I should be able to hold my son."

He also claimed in the deposition that he was the victim of a poorly handled police investigation.

http://www.ktvu.com/news/19334545/detail.html

"a poorly handled investigation"? That's sick, isn't it? He didn't try to find his wife and baby and he didn't try to help LE. He sure wasn't interested in hugging or loving them back then, was he? I guess absence makes the heart grow fond now. Or its just something to say besides taking the 5Th - must get boring after 195 times. Apparently he is still able to fool some people- even now. I'm sure glad the jury wasn't fooled.
I doubt a new jury would be fooled, but what is the point? The convicted murderer has nothing:no info, no money, not even an apology. Best to ignore him and move on. His time will come.

[SeaMaiden]

Originally Posted by joolz

Could you provide a link to the torch-bearing townspeople please?

I was wondering where this information came from as well. I certainly don't remember anything like that happening. Maybe it's just another figment of an over-active imagination? LOL!

IMO

[Amy]

Originally Posted by SeaMaiden

Thanks for posting this.

I found Scott's rants on his blog absolutely disgusting. Here's an idiotic sample:
"It is difficult to watch the press & others look to profit off of our loss & our emotions, & sell a story dishonoring my wife & son."

Funny thing, isn't it? He wasn't at all concerned with honoring his pregnant wife when he pretended to be be single, & then pursued Ms. Frey so avidly with champagne & roses.

He's still apparently totally delusional...

IMO

Oh, for Pete's sake!!! I have never, ever read ANYTHING from the press or anyone else that would "dishonor" his wife and son. The only person who did that was Scott Peterson himself. Oh, yeah, Lee and Jackie were doing a pretty good job of it, themselves. Even the Scott supporters don't dishonor Laci and Connor in their efforts to support him.

[Leanne Weich]

I guess it's easy to talk about loving and wanting to hold your wife and son when you've been sitting on death row for a while. I read he's now got a photo of Laci (and himself) in his cell. That's a change from when Vernon Crittendon (think that was his name) reported to one of the news outlets a while ago that he had no photos of Laci up in his cell. What's the bet he's found the Lord too ... so predictable, imo.

[Amy]

Originally Posted by Court Jester

I haven't read Ann Bird's book I'll have to check on that. I did read the one written by....uuuhhhh...a news correspondant...DARN! I can't remember her name, but she covered the trial.

Thank You Foxglove for the tip!

CJ

Catherine Crier.

[Lady_Jean_La]

Originally Posted by GentleBreeze

He is penniless anyway.

Yes, nothing to be gained by continuing.