BY JOHN COTÉ
BEE STAFF WRITER

Last Updated: November 13, 2003, 05:25:00 PM PST

5:23 p.m. PST: Laci Peterson’s remains were found in April 14 clad in tattered tan maternity pants with a 12- to 18-inch piece of duct tape attached, a police detective testified Thursday afternoon in her husband’s preliminary hearing on double murder charges.
Peterson’s sister, Amy Rocha, had earlier testified that Laci Peterson was wearing tan pants the evening of Dec. 23. Laci Peterson was reported missing the next day.

Sales records show Laci Peterson or her husband, Scott, had purchased a pair of the same style tan maternity pants, Detective Phil Owen said. Owen stared forward and appeared to clench his jaw when asked if he had viewed the body.

“Yes I did,” he said.

Owen, a 16-year veteran officer, gave the same three-word response when asked if he had observed the autopsy, then his eyes turned downward.

Laci Peterson’s mother, Sharon Rocha, got up and left the courtroom when the questioning turned to the site were her daughter’s body was found, the Point Isabel Regional Shoreline along San Francisco Bay near Richmond.

Scott Peterson, 31, is charged with murdering his wife and unborn son, Conner. Prosecutors are seeking the death penalty.

A doctor who examined Laci Peterson on Dec. 23 — the day before she was reported missing — said Conner would have been “a viable baby if the baby was born on that day with some assistance,” Owen said.

Peterson’s defense is scheduled to cross examine Owen Friday morning.

Outside the courthouse, Gloria Allred, the attorney for Fresno massage therapist Amber Frey, announced that prosecutors had decided not to call Frey to the stand during the preliminary hearing.

Frey was Scott Peterson’s girlfriend at the time Laci Peterson disappeared. Frey has said she did not know Peterson was married.

After Allred addressed the media, a paralegal from defense attorney Mark Geragos’ law firm handed her what appeared to be legal documents.

If that time is correct, Laci never walked the dog that day.

Scott said black pants? Hmmm... so we can ASSume that the killer changed her clothes? Nah, they were never changed from the 23rd in my opinion.

oh, yes, I think Laci never changed clothes after seeing Amy....I think she was killed later that night while still in those clothes.

In my opinion, or theory...

They came home on the 23rd, had an argument over some mail from Amber, a Christmas card, maybe, and then he killed her, bagged her, and then in the middle of the night threw her in the bay... only to return home, clean up the evidence, and then go back to the bay, to "pretend" to fish, in case anyone had seen him at the bay before.

I think that at some point during that day, he bought the tan pants to bring home and launder, so that people would have the illusion that Laci had not been in the same clothes, thus changing the date of her death from the 23rd to the 24th.

He never figured on anyone finding her body, let alone for the clothes to be left on her body to set a date of death.

I guess she did visit the Dr. on the 23rd, she just didn't have a sonogram that day.

"Dr. James Y.K. Yip confirmed Tuesday evening that he saw Peterson on Dec. 23, but he said the visit did not include a sonogram.

"There was no ultrasound picture of the baby that day," Yip said. "It was a routine prenatal visit for her."

IMO, though, the pants are yet flimsy evidence. Let's not forget, this "evidence" is going to go before a jury of his peers. I hope the jury is given clear and convincing evidence so they are able to have the proper tools when reaching their hopefully guilty verdict.

The best evidence they may be given is Scott's compulsive and relentless lying. If they feel he is and has been untruthful in his stories, they may decide to not consider anything he has said. That in itself would give them the clarity they need to find him guilty.

To clarify, have you read the lines of the woman at an agri-party that set Scott and Amber up? Scott told the woman he was SINGLE, and asked if she could set him up with A woman. We are adults, and we know what Scott wanted. Alas intro Amber, November 20, 2002.

So to clarify, cads are everywhere and the story is most usually the same, with slight variations. Smart women don't risk it. So based on those revelations, a 'romantic relationship' is that LOVE?

Would anyone have expected that Scott would admit to Peoples Mag and news reporters to the Amber relationship? I dont think so... however he did tell the police. Denying to the press does not equal guilt!

Well, he did NOT admit to police about the affair until sometime later. On Christmas Even, he denied to police that he was having an affair. It would have been in his best interest to admit to the press that yes, he was having an affair. Lying about it only did him more harm.

It is his denial of the affair from the start that started the public and potential jurors seeing him as a liar. The fact that it was released from police that he denied, when being asked Christmas Eve, that he was having an affair, is what started all of this.

The lies make people, press, police, family and friends, make them look at him much different, and that includes the potential jurors.

Although in my opinion, I would still think he was guilty, from evidence or chain of events that occurred, I would at least have said, "at least the guy is honest about the affair, and is being honest so far..."

I think the lying reflects more on his charater than on his guilt. The lies sound spur of the moment rather that planned out. I would think a man who planned to kill his wife (as early as Dec 9th) and dump her body in the bay would not use fishing in the same bay as an alibi.

He obvioulsy was lying to people. A habitual liar will tell a lie even when the truth wouldn't harm them because they think of the lie first. They are always on "cover up" mode.

I would like to see some more solid proof before I say he's guilty of murder and not just being a lying son of a b****.

I wouldn't say that he is guilty because of his lies. But it sure makes you wonder...

"...Al Brocchini testified this morning that he and Det. Craig Grogan discovered
"pliers with a big long hair sticking out of it" Feb. 11 while reviewing pictures taken some weeks before...."

Now on record are TWO strands of hair in the container where there should have been the one described above by Al Brocchini....and LE had seized Laci's hairbrush!
LE says the strand of hair must have broke apart in the bag????? ( had to be magic)

EXPERT: The pliers and a pair of wire cutters also examined at the DOJ lab in Ripon appeared rusted, and there was no indication they had been used recently...and the hair fragments are different shades of brown...