Scott Peterson is demanding prosecutors return his pickup truck and the $15,000 in cash he was carrying when he was arrested for killing his wife, Laci, and unborn son.

In court papers filed in Modesto, Calif., Tuesday, lawyers for the jailed 31-year-old said the money and the Ford vehicle currently held under police lock and key provide "absolutely no incriminating evidence against Mr. Peterson" while causing him and his family "severe and undue hardship."

Stanislaus County Superior Court Judge Al Girolami is scheduled to decide at a Dec. 3 hearing whether the cash and truck should be returned.

Prosecutor Rick Distaso refused last week to informally release the items, saying, "both are evidence used in these crimes, and I intend to introduce both at trial."

Peterson's lawyer, Mark Geragos, however, maintains that the district attorney's office can simply show jurors photos of the items, rather than relying on the truck and money itself.

Peterson faces the death penalty if convicted of the Christmastime slaying of his 27-year-old wife and the son they planned to name Conner. Girolami ruled last week that prosecutors have enough evidence to go forward with their case, but a trial date has not been set.

Defense lawyers claim the loss of the money and truck is a financial burden for Peterson's parents. The family is already footing his legal bill, and his father has said they are also covering mortgage payments on the couple's home.

Modesto police executing a search warrant Dec. 27 seized Peterson's Ford F150 truck as potential evidence in the disappearance of his wife. According to his defense, Peterson's family has continued making the $643 monthly payments on the truck since police impounded it.

When detectives arrested Peterson April 19, a few days after the remains of his wife and child washed up on the shore of San Francisco Bay, they confiscated a fake ID, several cell phones, a lot of clothing and some camping gear. Peterson's normally brown hair was blond and he had grown a goatee. At his preliminary hearing, prosecutors implied the cash and other items were an indication he planned to flee.

Does anyone think that they want to hold onto the cash because it may be drug money, as theorized in the $15,000 thread?

The Associated Press

SACRAMENTO, Calif. Dec. 3 — Prosecutors for the first time hinted at parts of their theory behind the Laci Peterson slaying, saying her husband Scott bled inside the truck he allegedly used to haul her body away after killing her.
Those details and others were presented Tuesday in a court filing prosecutors used to argue that jurors should be allowed to see the truck as evidence.

Prosecutors have never previously said Scott Peterson was wounded in the killing saying he was injured either during or after the alleged attack on his wife and have never publicly revealed where they believe Laci Peterson was killed.

Stanislaus County District Attorney James Brazelton said he wants jurors to view the truck as part of the crime scene because it was used to haul Laci Peterson's body to her husband's fertilizer warehouse and then to San Francisco Bay.

The mention that her body was trucked to Scott Peterson's nearby warehouse indicates prosecutors believe she was killed at home. It also explains why lawyers sparred at the preliminary hearing over a mop and bucket used to clean the couple's kitchen.

Defense attorneys want the truck returned to Peterson's family because he faces mounting legal bills and continues to pay $643 in monthly auto payments.

Lawyers will argue the matter Wednesday when Peterson, 31, is scheduled to be arraigned in Stanislaus County Superior Court on two counts of first-degree murder in the killings of his wife and unborn son nearly a year ago.

Peterson, a former fertilizer salesman, previously pleaded innocent but faces a second arraignment after a judge ruled last month there was enough evidence to go to trial.

The arraignment marks the beginning of the next phase of the case as the defense seeks to move the trial out of Modesto, lawyers argue over the admissibility of evidence and the news media ask the judge to consider unsealing court documents and lifting a gag order in the case.

Laci Peterson, 27, a substitute teacher who was eight months pregnant with the couple's first child, was reported missing Christmas Eve after her husband said he'd returned from a fishing trip at the Berkeley Marina. Her remains and those of the fetus washed ashore in April.

The headline was:

"CLUES IN SCOTT'S TRUCK"

They said that the truck was considered evidence by the prosecution because of blood found and because of cement residue.

I say, keep the truck and introduce it into court as evidence.

They also said that it was leaked that the prosecution has much more evidence that Scott killed her, but are waiting for trial.

It was also hinted at that Scott's attorney would be asking for a speedy trial.. that would mean a trial within 60 days. A change of venue request may disable the chance of that speedy trial.

On another note....my son was in a National Championship football tournament last weekend in Vegas and in the lobby of the Excalibar, there was a football team and I asked where they were from and they said Modesto. I said "Oh...Modesto..." and couldn't say anything further. It was just a sad feeling I had, they town has been through so much. Was strange how the whole week I was in Vegas I had no idea what was going on with the case and I ran across the Modesto team.

By JOHN COTÉ and GARTH STAPLEY
BEE STAFF WRITERS

Last Updated: December 4, 2003, 06:03:15 AM PST

Scott Peterson pleaded not guilty Wednesday to charges he murdered his pregnant wife and unborn son, and a judge scheduled a Jan. 26 jury trial.

"That's correct, your honor," Peterson told Stanislaus County Superior Court Judge Al Girolami. "I am innocent."

************************************cut part of article out

The trial date, which could be pushed back, was penciled in during Wednesday's wide-ranging hearing in which prosecutors agreed to turn over $15,000 in cash seized during Peterson's arrest. Also, Girolami ordered Peterson's pickup -- confiscated Dec. 27 -- released to defense attorney Mark Geragos.

************************************cut part of article out

Prosecutors will be ready if the trial starts Jan. 26, Chief Deputy District Attorney John Goold said outside court. But he acknowledged that court dates often are delayed.

"If they stick to that, we'll stick to it," Goold said.

If Girolami grants the defense motion to move the trial, logistics and planning would push the trial date back months, Goold said.

Prosecutors want to keep the trial in Modesto but would not oppose moving it if survey data from prosecution and defense jury experts indicate that an impartial jury cannot be seated in Stanislaus County, Goold said.

"There's no justice," he said, "in having a trial held somewhere it shouldn't be held."

Jury analyst expresses doubts

Jury expert Edward J. Bronson said it would be all but impossible to begin Jan. 26 if Peterson's camp officially requests that the trial be moved. Bronson's résumé includes cases involving the Unabomber, the Oklahoma City bombing and the San Francisco dog-mauling trial -- all moved to new venues.

Unrelenting national media attention to the case suggests that "it certainly seems appropriate for a change (of venue)," Bronson said, "but it's always hard to tell what a judge will do."

On the other hand, some high-profile cases have not moved precisely because of the heavy volume of news reports. They include the 1995 O.J. Simpson double-murder trial in Los Angeles and the 2002 San Diego trial of the man who murdered 7-year-old Danielle van Dam.

"The argument may be made that while there is a lot of prejudice in Modesto, there is nowhere you can go where that prejudice would be significantly reduced," Bronson said. That is why surveys must be conducted in other counties, he said.

Girolami wrote in a July ruling that moving the trial is "not a desirable option" and would result in "considerable hardship for the witnesses and added expense to the public."

************************************cut part of article out

Girolami stood firm behind the sweeping gag order he imposed in June, saying, "I think the protective order is still valid, and it will continue."

Geragos, who initially protested the gag order because it prevents him from defending his client in public, asked the judge to consider allowing rebuttals when "just plain wrong, wild theories" circulate.

"I don't think it's too much to ask, to contain the misinformation out there," Geragos argued.

Prosecutor Dave Harris disagreed.

Girolami brushed aside newspapers' request to unseal autopsy reports and search and arrest warrant documents in the case. The documents outline -- among other things -- detectives' reasoning for seeking warrants.

Charity Kenyon, an attorney for The Bee, argued that since the case had been laid out in the preliminary hearing, documents showing the basis for his arrest and for searching his home, warehouse and elsewhere should be open.

The defense and prosecution opposed unsealing the documents, saying widespread public dissemination could compromise Peterson's fair-trial rights. Geragos also said the move would compromise the ongoing investigation into the case.

Girolami agreed, saying "there are other things out there; the investigation is continuing."

The judge deferred setting hearings on a range of defense motions, including barring evidence from scent-tracking dogs. Defense attorneys also are asking for sanctions against prosecutors for intercepting phone calls between Peterson and members of his defense team.

And the defense moved to have Girolami's preliminary hearing ruling thrown out; in his ruling Nov. 18, he said prosecutors had presented sufficient evidence to warrant a trial. Judge Marie S. Silveira is scheduled to review this motion .

Elsewhere Wednesday, Board of Supervisors Chairman Ray Simon said the county is bracing to pay $1 million for the trial -- and possibly much more if Geragos does not keep the case.

"I have it from a good source that it's highly possible we'll never see Mr. Geragos again after the preliminary because there's not enough money (from Peterson) to pay him," Simon told a group of Modesto High alumni. "The public defender could be defending Mr. Peterson, and that will come from the taxpayers."

Geragos, however, made a "general appearance" in the case Wednesday, meaning he is the attorney of record for the rest of the case, barring incapacitation.

Modesto attorney Kirk McAllister, who began representing Peterson shortly after Laci Peterson was reported missing Christmas Eve and later joined Geragos on the defense team, will take a lesser role in the case.

The link for this article in it's entirety:
http://www.modbee.com/local/story/7850704p-8732992c.html

The $15,000 ordered to be returned to Attorney Geragos, was probably retainer attorney fees. Has to come from somewhere, they don't work hours for nothing! Explanation of the $15,000 will be made during the trial.

He could have cut his hand, either when he was killing his wife, or discarding of her body. His blood in the truck IS evidence.

Yes, it should be released as long as all evidence has been entered and preserved or removed from the vehicle and photos taken.

As far as the money goes, they can Photograph it and write down the numbers on the bills for evidence, they don't need to hold the money.

Although, I would hate to see that he profited by getting them both back ... if he is found guilty that is.

Personally, I don't think that the truck should go back to him until after the trial.

Defence says goodbye to truck payments what ? $630 per month? All prosecution has to do is pay off the balance if they want it, it's their's. I'm sure Geragos wouldn't mind selling the truck to prosecution. Prosecution has turned into used car business :) That was what all the chuckles and grins in the court house were about this week.