Scott Peterson Motion 2024

1/17/2024
LOS ANGELES INNOCENCE PROJECT

1
PAULA MITCHELL (BAR NO. 230427)*
2 ELIZA HANEY (BAR NO. 311570)
PAIGE MCGRAIL (BAR NO. 343168)
3 HILARY MORMAN (BAR NO. 333630)
Hertzberg-Davis Forensic Science Center
4
1800 Paseo Rancho Castilla
5 Los Angeles, CA 90032
Telephone: (323) 343-4640
6
7 Email: [email protected]
8 Attorneys for Defendant Scott Peterson

9
10 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OFCALIFORNIA
11 FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN MATEO
12 ) CASE NO.: SC055500A

13 ) RELATED CASES:
) SUPREME COURT NO. S132449;
14 PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ) COURT OF APPEAL CASE NO. A167615
PLAINTIFF, )
15 ) NOTICE OF MOTION; MOTION
16 VS. ) FOR POST-CONVICTION
) DISCOVERY (PEN. CODE § 1054.9);
17 SCOTT PETERSON, ) MEMORANDUM OF POINTS &
DEFENDANT. ) AUTHORITIES; DECLARATIONS;
18 ) EXHIBITS
19 )
) HRG. DATE: TBA
20 ) HRG. TIME: TBA
DEPT:
21
22 TO: THE HONORABLE JUDGE PRESIDING IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE
23 STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN MATEO:
24 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that on ____ at 8:30 a.m., or as soon thereafter as counsel
25 may be heard in Department ____ of the above-entitled court, defendant Scott Peterson, by and
26 through counsel, Los Angeles Innocence Project (LAIP), will move this court for an order
27 directing the People to provide the requested post-conviction discovery he is entitled to under
28 Penal Code section 1054.9. Mr. Peterson has a Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus that is
1
Case No.: SC055500A – The People v. Scott Peterson
NOTICE OF MOTION; MOTION FOR POST-TRIAL DISCOVERY
(Cal. Pen. Code § 1054.9)
Laxm‘‘ixr’
rm
pending before the California Court of Appeal, First Appellate District, Case No. Al67615, led
April 19, 2023 (hereaer 2023 Petition), asserting violations of state and federal constitutional
rights and state statutory rights, including Brady claims and a claim of actual innocence that is
supported by newly discovered evidence. Mr. Peterson incorporates by reference each of the facts
—
alleged in the Petition and requests that this Court take judicial notice of all pleadings and lings
in People v Peterson, San Mateo County Superior Court Case Number SC055500A, People v.
Peterson, Case Number Sl 32449, In re Peterson. Case Number $230782. Mr. Peterson is
currently in the custody ofthe California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation serving a
sentence of life without the possibility of parole.
This motion is made pursuant to Penal Code section 1054.9 and is based upon the facts
and grounds set forth in this Motion, the accompanying Memorandum of Points and Authorities,
the supporting Declaration of Counsel, the documents on le with the Court in the above-named
related cases, as well as any other evidence or testimony the Court may hear. This motion is led
concurrently with Mr. Peterson’s Motion to File Documents Under Seal and Motion for DNA
Testing pursuant to Penal Code section 1405.
Mr. Peterson, through his counsel, has informally requested the discovery sought by way
of this motion from the Stanislaus County District Attomey’s Ofce, with a copy of the request
provided to the Attorney General’s Ofce, along with an offer to meet and confer to streamline
the discovery process. (Exh. 1 [Dec]. of Paula Mitchell] at 1] 8.) Mr. Peterson respectfully
requests that the Court grant this Motion and direct the People provide the requested discovery so
that further investigation into the claims set forth in the pending Petition can be conducted.
Dated: 2024 Respectfully submitted,

January”
N
aula Mitchell
Attorney for Scott Peterson
2
Case No.: SC055500A — The People v. Scott Peterson
NOTICE 0F MOTION; MOTION FOR POST-TRIAL DISCOVERY
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1
2
3 I. STATEMENT OF FACTS ..............................................................................................7
4 A. Background ...................................................................................................................7
5
B. Procedural History........................................................................................................7
6
C. Prior Motions Filed Pursuant to Penal Code section 1054.9 ....................................8
7
II. MR. PETERSON IS ENTITLED TO THE DISCOVERY REQUESTED
8 HEREIN ............................................................................................................................9
9
A. Applicable Legal Standard: Penal Code section 1054.9 ...........................................9
10
B. Mr. Peterson Seeks Materials In The Possession Of The Prosecution
11 That Fall Within The Categories For Which Steele Requires
Disclosure .....................................................................................................................11
12
III. DISCOVERY REQUESTED.........................................................................................12
13
14 A. Medina Burglary .........................................................................................................13
15 B. Lt. Xavier Aponte Reports .........................................................................................26

16 C. Croton Watch ..............................................................................................................31
17 D. December 25, 2002, Van Fire in Airport District .....................................................35
18
E. Eyewitnesses Who Reported Seeing Laci Peterson On or After
19 December 24, 2002 ......................................................................................................41
20 F. Eyewitnesses Who Reported to MPD that They Had Seen the
Petersons’ Dog, McKenzi, Alone and Unattended in the La Loma
21
Neighborhood the Morning of December 24, 2004 ..................................................44
22
G. Missing Bates Pages ....................................................................................................46
23
H. Gene Ralston Reports, Videos, and Other Data Related to Bay
24 Searches .......................................................................................................................48
25
I. All Reports, Videos, and Other Data Related to Bay Searches ..............................49
26
J. Computer Forensics ....................................................................................................57
27
K. Scent Dogs ....................................................................................................................57
28
3
L. Modesto Police Department and Stanislaus County District Attorney
1
Office Policies in Place in 2002–2005 Governing Disclosure of Conflicts
2 of Interest Concerning Personal and/or Romantic Relationships
Between Prosecutors and Law Enforcement Officials Working on the
3 Same Case ....................................................................................................................58
4 M. Any New Reports, Leads, Evidence, or Tips Received by MPD or Any
5 Other Law Enforcement Agency Since the Date of Mr. Peterson’s
Conviction Identifying Individuals Other than Mr. Peterson as
6 Possibly Involved or Responsible for the Disappearance and Deaths of
Laci and Conner Peterson ..........................................................................................59
7
8 N. Audio and Video Recordings of MPD Interviews With and
Surveillance of Scott Peterson and Transcripts Thereof, Not Yet
9 Provided .......................................................................................................................60
10 O. Tracy Tip .....................................................................................................................61
11
P. Current Evidence/Property & Chain of Custody Logs for All Evidence
12 Items .............................................................................................................................62
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4
1
2 TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
3 Page(s)
Cases
4
5 Barnett v. Superior Court,
(2010) 50 Cal. 4th 890 ........................................................................................................... 9, 10
6 Brady v. Maryland,
7 (1963) 373 U.S. 83 .................................................................................................................... 62
Giglio v. United States,
8 (1972) 405 U.S. 150 .................................................................................................................. 62
In re Steele,
9 (2004) 32 Cal. 4th 682 ..................................................................................................... 8, 10, 11
10 People v. Peterson,
(2020) 10 Cal.5th 409 .................................................................................................................. 7
11 People v. Whalen,
(2013) 56 Cal. 4th 1 ................................................................................................................... 62
12 Strickler v. Greene,
13 (1999) 527 U.S. 263 .................................................................................................................. 62
United States v. Bagley,
14 (1985) 473 U.S. 667 .................................................................................................................. 62
15 Statutes
16
Cal. Pen. Code § 1054.9......................................................................................................... Passim
17 Evid. Code § 351.1........................................................................................................................ 13
Penal Code section 187 ................................................................................................................... 7
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
5
INDEX OF EXHIBITS
1
EXHIBIT DOCUMENT
2 1 Declaration of Paula Mitchell
2 Declaration of Scott Peterson
3 3 2011 1054.9 Pleadings and Order
4 4 Declaration of Susan Medina
5 Declaration of Carl Jenson
5 6 Declaration of Gary Ermoian
7 Declaration of Paige McGrail
6 8 Declaration of George Michael Gudgell
7 9 Declaration of Bryan Spitulski
10 Declaration of Homer Maldonado
8 11 Declaration of Tony Freitas
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
6
1 MEMORANDUM OF POINTS & AUTHORITIES
2 I. STATEMENT OF FACTS
3 A. Background
4 Mr. Peterson respectfully requests that the court refer to the Statement of Facts set forth
5 in his Motion for DNA Testing pursuant to Penal Code section 1405, filed concurrently herewith.
6 B. Procedural History
7 Scott Peterson was charged in Stanislaus Superior Court with the murders of his wife Laci
8 and their unborn child, Conner, in violation of Penal Code section 187. 1 The information added
9 a multiple murder special circumstance in violation of section 190.2, subdivision (a)(3). Mr.
10 Peterson has maintained his innocence since his arrest in 2003. (Exh. 2 [Decl. of Scott Peterson]
11 at ¶ 2.) Mr. Peterson pleaded not guilty and was tried by jury.
12 On November 12, 2004, a jury found Mr. Peterson guilty of first-degree murder with
13 special circumstances; he was sentenced to death on March 16, 2005. On August 24, 2020, the
14 California Supreme Court affirmed the conviction but vacated Mr. Peterson’s death sentence.
15 Initially, the District Attorney’s Office of Stanislaus County indicated it would re-try the penalty
16 phase and seek a second death sentence for Mr. Peterson. But after Mr. Peterson made an informal
17 request for additional discovery, the prosecution announced it would not go forward with a second
18 penalty phase trial and instead stipulate to a lesser sentence. On December 8, 2021, Mr. Peterson
19 was resentenced to a term of life without the possibility of parole.
20 In 2015, Mr. Peterson filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus with the California
21 Supreme Court raising multiple claims of error. On October 14, 2020, the Supreme Court issued
22 an Order to Show Cause as to as to the alleged claim of juror misconduct. This court held an
23 evidentiary hearing concerning the juror misconduct issue and denied Mr. Peterson’s petition on
24 December 20, 2022. On April 19, 2023, Mr. Peterson filed a pro se petition for a writ of habeas
25 corpus in the First Appellate District of the Court of Appeal, raising the claim of juror misconduct,
26 as well as a claim of innocence supported by new evidence. The Court of Appeal ordered the
27
28 1
See People v. Peterson (2020) 10 Cal.5th 409, for a complete summary of the procedural history in Mr.
Peterson’s case. For the sake of brevity, only a brief overview is set forth in this motion.
7
1 Attorney General to file an informal response, which was filed on July 28, 2023. On December
2 1, 2023, the Court of Appeal suspended informal briefing in Mr. Peterson’s habeas proceeding at
3 his request, to allow his counsel to conduct further investigation into his claim of innocence,
4 including the filing of this motion and the motion for DNA testing filed concurrently herewith.
5 (Exh. 1 [Decl. of Paula Mitchell] at ¶ 10.)
6 C. Prior Motions Filed Pursuant to Penal Code section 1054.9
7 Counsel has reviewed the discovery the defense was provided at the time of trial and
8 during post-conviction proceedings in this case and endeavored to reconstruct the trial file to
9 determine whether there are any gaps or omissions in material evidence Mr. Peterson was
10 provided at the time of trial, or thereafter. (Exh. 7 [Decl. of Paige McGrail] at ¶ 3; Exh. 1 at ¶ 6.)
11 On February 18, 2010, the California Supreme Court appointed Lawrence Gibbs to
12 represent Mr. Peterson in connection with his habeas proceedings. On October 20, 2011, Mr.
13 Gibbs filed a motion for post-conviction discovery pursuant to Penal Code section 1054.9 in
14 Stanislaus County Superior Court. On November 7, 2011, the prosecution filed an opposition to
15 the motion. On November 18, 2011, the court issued an order granting in part, and denying in
16 part, Mr. Peterson’s post-conviction discovery motion. (Exh. 3, 2011 Motion for Post-Conviction
17 Discovery, People’s Opposition, and Court Order.)
18 On November 14, 2023, counsel for Mr. Peterson sent a request to Stanislaus County
19 District Attorney Jeff Laugero requesting informal discovery of the items he seeks by way of this
20 motion, with a copy to Deputy Attorney General Donna Provenzano. (Exh. 1 [Decl. of Paula
21 Mitchell] at ¶ 8, Exh. A.) On December 14, 2023, counsel received a response from Special
22 Prosecutor Birgit Fladager of the Stanislaus County District Attorney’s Office, who stated that
23 “there is no informal discovery process provided for” under the statute. (Id. at ¶ 11, Exh. D.)
24 Although the California Supreme Court has stated otherwise (In re Steele (2004) 32 Cal.4th 682,
25 692), counsel for Mr. Peterson has filed this motion to seek court enforcement of the post-
26 conviction discovery process in light of the Stanislaus County District Attorney’s Office’s
27 representation, and in order to make every effort to meet the deadlines imposed by the Court of
28 Appeal suspending briefing in Mr. Peterson’s pending habeas proceedings. (Exh. 1 at ¶ 12.)
8
1 Based on counsel’s review of the record and evidence in this case, there is good cause to
2 believe the discovery sought by way of this motion has not been previously provided to the
3 defense, or if it was, it is no longer found in the trial files provided to counsel. The Court should
4 grant this motion, and the motion for DNA testing filed herewith, so further investigation can be
5 conducted, and Mr. Peterson can develop the evidence needed to support his claim of innocence.
6 II. MR. PETERSON IS ENTITLED TO THE DISCOVERY REQUESTED HEREIN
7 A. Applicable Legal Standard: Penal Code section 1054.9
8 Penal Code section 1054.9 provides this Court with the authority to order the prosecution
9 to provide the defense with the requested discovery. It provides in relevant part:
10
(a) In a case involving a conviction of a serious felony or a violent felony resulting
11 in a sentence of 15 years or more, upon the prosecution of a post-conviction writ of
habeas corpus or a motion to vacate a judgment, or in preparation to file that writ
12 or motion, and on a showing that good faith efforts to obtain discovery materials
from trial counsel were made and were unsuccessful, the court shall, except as
13
provided in subdivision (b) or (d), order that the defendant be provided reasonable
14 access to any of the materials described in subdivision (c). . . .
15 (c) For purposes of this section, “discovery materials” means materials in the
16 possession of the prosecution and law enforcement authorities to which the same
defendant would have been entitled at time of trial.
17
(Pen. Code, § 1054.9 [emphasis added].)
18
While the legislative history of section 1054.9 reflects that the statute’s main purpose was
19
to enable defendants to reconstruct defense attorney’s trial files that might have become lost or
20
destroyed, discovery under the statute is not limited to that purpose. (See Barnett v. Superior
21
Court (2010) 50 Cal. 4th 890, 898–901 [discussing the legislative history and explaining that “the
22
statutory language provides for more than that,” including discovery of materials “to which trial
23
counsel was legally entitled” (citations omitted)]; Steele, supra, 32 Cal.4th at pp. 694, 696
24
[explaining that section 1054.9 discovery also includes “materials that the prosecution would have
25
been obligated to provide had there been a specific defense request at trial, but was not actually
26
obligated to provide because no such request was made”].) Additionally, Penal Code section
27
1054.9 requires that materials and information “in the possession of . . . law enforcement
28
9
1 authorities” must be turned over, not solely information that is in the hands of the prosecutor.
2 (Steele, supra, 32 Cal.4th at p. 695.)
3 To obtain post-conviction discovery beyond file reconstruction, a defendant must show a
4 “reasonable basis to believe that the specific materials they seek actually existed.” (Barnett,
5 supra, 50 Cal. 4th at 901.) A reasonable basis to believe that the prosecution had possessed the
6 materials in the past can provide a reasonable basis to believe the prosecution still possesses the
7 materials. (Ibid.)
8 A defendant does not need to establish materiality to obtain the requested evidence. “If a
9 petitioner can show he has a reasonable basis for believing a specific item of exculpatory evidence
10 exists, he is entitled to receive that evidence without additionally having to show its materiality.”
11 (Id.) There is no requirement that the petitioner show that it is reasonably probable the result
12 would have been different had the evidence been disclosed. The standard for post-trial discovery
13 is lower than the standard of proving a Brady violation. (Id.)
14 In re Steele sets forth the relevant categories of permissible discovery under section
15 1054.9. Those categories include material that:
16 (1) the prosecution did provide at time of trial but have since become lost to
17 the defendant;
18 (2) the prosecution should have provided at time of trial because they came
19 within the scope of a discovery order the trial court actually issued at that
20 time, a statutory duty to provide discovery, or the constitutional duty to
21 disclose exculpatory evidence;
22 (3) the prosecution should have provided at time of trial because the defense
23 specifically requested them at that time and was entitled to receive them;
24 or,
25 (4) the prosecution had no obligation to provide at time of trial absent a specific
26 defense request, but to which the defendant would have been entitled at
27 time of trial had the defendant specifically requested them.
28 (Steele, supra, 32 Cal.4th. at p. 697.)
10
1 As the four categories articulated in In re Steele make clear, the scope of discovery
2 available under section 1054.9 is broad. Moreover, a defendant is not required to establish the
3 precise Steele category to which her request belongs. For example, in Steele, the California
4 Supreme Court was untroubled by the fact that it was not clear whether the defense had sought
5 certain items of discovery prior to trial; what mattered for purposes of section 1054.9 was that the
6 defense would have been entitled to such discovery if they had requested those items. (Id. at p.
7 702.)
8 B. Mr. Peterson Seeks Materials In The Possession Of The Prosecution That Fall
9 Within The Categories For Which Steele Requires Disclosure
10 Mr. Peterson, by and through his counsel, has made good faith efforts to obtain the items
11 requested in this motion including before, during and after his trial, but has been unsuccessful.
12 (Exh. 1 at ¶¶ 4–6.) The steps Mr. Peterson has taken, through his counsel, to locate the materials
13 requested herein include reviewing the entire trial file, uploading the discovery onto a digitized,
14 searchable database so the materials can be searched, and creating various indices to track and
15 assess the items of discovery which have and have not been provided to the defense. (Id. at ¶ 6.)
16 Mr. Peterson has a reasonable belief the prosecution possesses the items requested in this motion,
17 which have not been provided to the defense, and he has set forth those reasons in the letter to the
18 prosecution seeking informal discovery. (See Exh. 1 at ¶ 8, Exh. A.) The discovery Mr. Peterson
19 seeks, described in detail, infra, falls within the categories for which Steele requires disclosure.
20 The Court should grant this motion and order the prosecution to conduct a sweeping search
21 of its various systems, files, and storage facilities, and inquire of the relevant law enforcement
22 authorities involved in the investigation, to locate the discovery requested. Mr. Peterson is
23 especially concerned that audio and video recordings that have exculpatory value are being
24 suppressed. 2
25
2
The Stanislaus County District Attorney’s Office admitted as recently as 2016 that it had no competent
26 procedure in place to ensure the prosecution was complying with its discovery and Brady obligations and its
constitutional duty to protect the due process rights of defendants in serious felony cases. (See, e.g., People v. Frank
27 Carson, et al., Superior Court of Stanislaus County, No. 1490969, December 22, 2016 Transcript of Proceedings,
Zuniga, J. [D.A.’s Office sanctioned after admitting it had suppressed 82 audio and video files, including exculpatory
28 evidence, due to failed systems in place]; see also, Modesto Bee, “Judge slams DA’s Office mistakes in Modesto
murder case,” available at https://www.modbee.com/news/local/crime/article122770744.html [last visited January 16,
11
1 III. DISCOVERY REQUESTED
2 The discovery Mr. Peterson seeks by way of this motion generally falls into the following
3 categories:
4 A. Medina Burglary Investigation Reports
5 B. Lt. Xavier Aponte Reports and Recordings re Medina Burglary
6 C. Laci Peterson’s Missing Croton Watch and Pawn Shop Investigation
7 D. Incendiary Van Fire in Airport District the Morning of December 25, 2002
8 E. Eyewitnesses Who Reported Seeing Laci Peterson On or After December 24
9 F. Eyewitnesses Who Reported Seeing the Petersons’ Dog Alone and Unattended
10 G. Missing Bates Pages
11 H. Gene Ralston Reports, Videos, and Other Data Related to Bay Searches
12 I. All Reports, Videos, and Other Data Related to Bay Searches
13 J. Computer Forensics Evidence Related Time Mr. Peterson Arrived at his Office
14 K. Scent Dogs Reports, Including Water Cadaver Dogs Employed in Bay Searches
15 L. MPD & SCD Policies Governing Disclosure of Conflicts of Interest
16 M. New Reports & Leads
17 N. Audio and Video Recordings of MPD Interviews with Scott Peterson
18 O. Tracy Tip
19 P. Current Evidence/Property & Chain of Custody Logs for All Evidence Items
20 Mr. Peterson has a reasonable basis to believe the prosecution possesses the post-
21 conviction discovery he seeks because it relates to evidence that is either known to exist because
22 it is referred to in police reports or other discovery, or because Modesto Police Department
23 (MPD) detectives and personnel have publicly stated that it exists, and/or the requested discovery
24 is reasonably believed to exist because it is evidence that would be expected to be gathered and
25 investigated as part of a capital murder case. (Exh. 1 at ¶ 8, Exh. A.) Accordingly, Mr. Peterson
26
27 2024].) If the District Attorney’s Office had no procedures in place in 2016 to comply with its Brady obligations, it
can fairly be assumed the systems in place in 2002–2005 were also deficient. Indeed, the trial record in this case is
28 replete with instances of the court having to admonish the prosecution for failing to turn over Brady materials to the
defense, including sanctioning the prosecution for its egregious misconduct. (See e.g., 74 RT 14315–17.)
12
1 respectfully requests an order from the Court directing the People to provide the following
2 discovery:
3 A. Medina Burglary
4 A complete copy of the Modesto Police Department’s investigation into the burglary of
5 the Medinas’ home at 516 Covena Avenue (Medina burglary), located directly across the street
6 from the Petersons’ home, which occurred sometime between December 24, 2002, and December
7 26, 2002. (Modesto Police Department Case No. 02-143025.) The items requested include but
8 are not limited to the following:
9 1. Audio and video recordings of the interviews MPD conducted with Steven
10 Todd and Donald Glenn Pearce at the Modesto Police Department the evening of January 2, 2003,
11 concerning their involvement in the Medina burglary. Mr. Peterson also requests any available
12 transcripts of those interviews.
13 2. All MPD investigation and other police reports memorializing the steps
14 MPD took to “verify” the alibis of Steven Todd and Donald Glenn Pearce, establishing their
15 whereabouts on December 24, 2002, including all interviews conducted with “independent
16 witnesses” who confirmed their alibis, including audio and video recordings thereof, as well as
17 written transcripts.
18 3. All police reports, audio and video recordings, and other relevant materials
19 indicating that MPD verified “the truthfulness” of the statements of Steven Todd and Donald
20 Glenn Pearce provided and cleared them of any involvement in the disappearance of Laci
21 Peterson.
22 4. All reports, notes, computer generated data and results, Informed Consent
23 Forms and/or Polygraph Examination Waiver Forms and/or Polygraph Examination Statement of
24 Consent Forms and/or Miranda Waiver Forms and/or signed confessions by Todd and Pearce,
25 related to the investigation by MPD and/or California DOJ Polygraph Examiner Jeannie Overall’s
26 polygraph examinations of Steven Todd and Donald Glenn Pearce conducted on January 3, 2003. 3
27
3
In 2011, Mr. Peterson requested “polygraph charts of burglars Steven Todd and Donald Pearce,” and the
28 court denied the request as follows: “The results of the polygraph examinations are not admissible. (Evid. Code §
351.1.) The validity of the polygraph examiner’s conclusions are irrelevant, and could not lead to admissible
13
1 5. A complete copy of the handwritten notes and all other materials generated
2 by or located within the files of CA DOJ Polygraph Examiner Jeannie Overall related to the
3 polygraph examinations of Todd and Pearce on January 3, 2003, including notes or reports
4 explaining the basis for the examiner’s decision not to ask either Todd or Pearce whether they
5 had any information about other individuals involved in the Medina burglary, or whether any of
6 their associates participated with them in the Medina burglary, or whether they had any
7 knowledge of anyone else who was or may have been involved in the abduction of Laci Peterson.
8 6. Identification of the MPD vehicles in which Todd and Pearce were
9 interviewed on January 2, 2003, prior to being transported to the MPD, and whether those vehicles
10 were equipped with audio and/or video recording capability on that date. If the vehicle was
11 equipped with recording devices, Mr. Peterson requests the audio and/or video recordings of those
12 interviews. 4
13 7. Handwritten notes taken by MPD officers who interviewed Steven Todd
14 and Donald Glenn Pearce on January 2, 2003, while Todd and Pearce were seated in in the back
15 of a police patrol vehicle giving explicit details concerning their involvement in the Medina
16 burglary the evening of January 2, 2003.
17 8. All other interviews, recordings, and contacts made by MPD and/or other
18 law enforcement with Todd and Pearce during the 18 hours they were in custody, between the
19 commencement of the raid at the 1406–1407 Tenaya Drive properties commencing around 5:30
20 p.m. on January 2, 2003, and the recorded polygraph examinations that started at 11:30 a.m. on
21 January 3, 2003, apart from the discovery already requested above.
22
evidence. Therefore, the graphs that were the subject of the polygraph examiner’s conclusions are not discoverable.”
23 (Exh. 1 at ¶ 7, Exh. A at pp. 4–5 of the order.) To the extent the polygraph discovery contains any information that
could lead to exculpatory information—including any information that would contradict law enforcement’s
24 representation that they were able to “verify” Todd and Pearce’s alibis (Exh. 5 ¶ 67, Exh. I to the Motion for DNA
Testing)—Mr. Peterson is entitled to that discovery pursuant to Brady and its progeny, and the Court should order
25 the prosecution to disclose it forthwith.
26 4
As is apparent from other witness interviews in this case, critical and exonerating information provided by
witnesses to law enforcement was not included or, in Det. Brocchini’s words, was “excised” when witness statements
27 were memorialized in written reports. (See RT 11191–11192 [explaining that Det. Brocchini excised critically
important exculpatory information provided by witness Peggy O’Donnell from his written report].) Accordingly, Mr.
28 Peterson is requesting production of all audio and/or video recordings of witness statements, even where written
reports of those statements have been provided.
14
1 9. All MPD and other law enforcement agency reports, notes, statements,
2 and/or other documents related to Steven Todd’s release from custody and re-arrest on January 6,
3 2003, including, but not limited to:
4 a. All reports and/or documents related to Steven Todd’s apparent
5 posting of bail for release after his arraignment on January 6, 2003;
6 b. The report from the arresting officer;
7 c. All reports and information regarding the basis for Todd’s re-arrest;
8 d. All notes, reports, and/or audio and video recordings of statements
9 made by Todd at the time of his rearrest, or while otherwise in MPD and/or
10 Stanislaus County Sheriff’s Department custody;
11 e. All investigative efforts into whether Todd utilized cash stolen
12 from the Medina property to post his bail bond on January 6, 2003.
13 10. Booking photos for Steven Todd and Donald Glenn Pearce taken upon
14 their arrest on January 2, 2003, and all prior arrests. Photos documenting any physical injuries
15 on the persons of Todd and/or Pearce at the time of their arrest on January 2, 2003. Fingerprints
16 (10 print cards) and palm prints for Todd and Pearce collected by MPD on January 2, 2003. All
17 recordings of phone calls made by Steven Todd and Donald Glen Pearce while they were in
18 custody from the time of their arrests on January 2, 2003, until the time they were transferred to
19 state prison.
20 11. All audio and/or video recordings and written witness interview reports
21 showing that MPD interviewed Susan and Rudy Medina about what they witnessed on the
22 morning of December 24, 2002, prior to leaving town, and whether they saw any suspicious
23 activity on their street, including whether either was shown photographs of Steven Todd and/or
24 Donald Glenn Pearce in attempt to identify whether they had seen either man on Covena Avenue
25 that morning. 5
26
27 5
See Exh. 4, Decl. of Susan Medina [sworn statement attesting to the fact that the Medinas witnessed a
suspicious-looking man on their street, in front of their house, on December 24, as they were driving away to go out
28 of town; the man so concerned them that it caused them to circle the block to check where he was going].
15
1 12. All reports, interviews, audio and/or video recordings following up on
2 information provided by Lillian V., who reported to MPD on January 1, 2003, that on December
3 24, 2002, she had seen “a man on a bicycle” on Covena between the park and Encina, about
4 10:15–10:20 a.m., whom she described as “5’8”, white male, weathered face, long blunt hair to
5 ears, turned his head away, bicycle was loaded with saddle bags, transient type person, relatively
6 well groomed didn’t respond to her saying hello,” including whether Lillian V. was shown
7 photographs of either Steven Todd or Donald Glenn Pearce to see whether she could identify
8 either of them as the man she reported seeing.
9 13. All reports, notes, interviews, recordings, and/or any other documents
10 related to the information provided to MPD by the teacher of Steven Todd’s son, including
11 statements that the mother of Steven Todd’s child had a history of selling babies in open
12 adoptions, and indications from Steven Todd’s son about violent acts on a pregnant woman, and
13 any subsequent investigation based on the information provided.
14 14. MPD’s reports, notes, and other records documenting the investigative
15 steps taken to determine the status of Steven Todd’s methamphetamine use on December 24–26,
16 2002, which would have compromised his ability to recall dates and times of events that week. 6
17 15. Cell phone records obtained by law enforcement for Donald Glenn Pearce,
18 Steven Todd, and/or any other suspect in the Medina burglary investigation for the period
19 December 24–26, 2002.
20 16. A copy of Donald Glenn Pearce’s receipt for the purchase of a Nokia
21 phone on December 24, 2002, as noted in the report of the January 2, 2003 search of 1406 and/or
22 1407 Tenaya Drive properties.
23 17. MPD police investigation reports, arrest reports, notes, recordings, and/or
24 other documents detailing Officer Mike Hicks’s prior contacts with Donald Glenn Pearce and
25 Stephen Todd as indicated in Det. Stough’s and Det. Hicks’s reports.
26
27 6
Todd reported in an interview with a defense investigator that he was “so high on meth and crack” during the
week of December 24–26, 2002, he didn’t really remember anything he did during that period, but Mr. Peterson has
28 received no discovery reflecting that information. (See Exh. 5 [Decl. of Carl Jensen] ¶ 5 [sworn statement
documenting Todd’s statements made in an interview in 2004].)
16
1 18. All recordings, interview memoranda, audio and video recordings, and
2 transcripts thereof, and/or other notes of communications between representatives of the
3 Stanislaus County District Attorney’s Office, and other law enforcement, with suspects Todd and
4 Pearce, related to their role in the Medina burglary, including but not limited to plea negotiations,
5 incentives offered, charges to be brought in the criminal complaints, plea agreements entered into,
6 the factual basis for the pleas entered into, abstracts of judgments, and custody records for Steve
7 Todd and Donald Glenn Pearce.
8 19. All reports, notes, interviews, audio/video recordings and transcripts
9 thereof, photographs, and/or any other documents relating to the January 2, 2003 searches MPD
10 conducted pursuant to warrants issued in the Medina burglary investigation, including but not
11 limited to the addresses located in the Airport District that MPD searched in connection with the
12 investigation into the Medina burglary, as well as:
13 a. The warrants issued and returns filed on the above-described
14 properties, including descriptions and photographs of all items of evidence
15 found including, but not limited to stolen items recovered and identified as
16 not belonging to the Medinas;
17 b. Property destruction and/or release forms for all items collected,
18 identified as the Medinas’ property, and turned over to their possession;
19 c. Photographs of all locations searched and all items recovered,
20 including the Medinas’ safe, jewelry, tools, and money wrappers 7;
21 d. Interviews or reports documenting whether the Medinas were
22 shown any jewelry collected during the above-referenced searches that did
23 not belong to them 8;
24
25 7
Mr. Peterson has not been provided with photos of all the jewelry recovered during the search of the subject
properties and recovered from other sources in the course of the Medina burglary investigation. That evidence is
26 material because police determined jewelry was missing from the Petersons’ home that Laci may have been wearing
at the time she disappeared.
27
8
See Exh. 4 [Decl. of Susan Medina] ¶ 24 [sworn statement attesting to the fact that she was shown jewelry
28 to see if she could identify it as jewelry stolen from the Medinas’ home and there were items of jewelry she did not
recognize].
17
1 e. Interviews or reports documenting whether Scott Peterson was
2 shown any jewelry collected during the above-referenced searches to see
3 whether he could identify it as having belonged to Laci;
4 f. Audio/video recordings and transcripts thereof, notes, reports, or
5 any other documents relating to all interviews conducted, or statements
6 obtained, during the above-referenced searches;
7 g. Notes, reports, correspondence, or other documents authored by all
8 officers present for and involved in the above-referenced searches,
9 including, but not limited to the following MPD personnel: Sgt. Cloward,
10 Officer Kelley, Officer Gonzales, Officer Intorf, Officer Pimentel, Det.
11 Grogan, Officer Meyer, Agt. Brodie, Sgt. Helton, Det. Hicks, Officer
12 Locke, Officer Fainter, Officer Ramirez, Lt. Watts, Agt. Suazo, Officer
13 Sanchez, and Officer Garcia.
14 20. Reports, notes, photographs, audio/video recordings and transcripts
15 thereof, results of forensic testing, and/or other documents related to the gun and jewelry
16 anonymously dropped off at the Modesto Police Department on January 2, 2003, including but
17 not limited to:
18 a. Digital copy of videotaped surveillance footage from the Modesto
19 Police Department lobby taken at approximately 1:10 a.m. on January 3,
20 2003, depicting a white male adult, late 20s–30s, 5’8” tall, approximately
21 150 pounds, coming into the lobby carrying a blue plastic shopping bag,
22 and telling the officer in the callbox he wanted to turn in some stolen
23 property, which was later determined to be jewelry and a gun from the
24 Medina burglary.
25 b. All reports, notes, photographs, audio and video recordings and
26 transcripts thereof, and other documents regarding any investigation into
27 the identity of the person or persons who anonymously dropped off items
28 stolen in the Medina burglary to the MPD station.
18
1 c. Officer Serratos’ report documenting the recovery of the gun inside
2 the shopping bags delivered to the MPD referenced above;
3 d. Photographs of recovered property taken by CSO Hodson.
4 21. Police reports and/or notes documenting investigative steps taken in the
5 investigation of the Medina burglary concerning eyewitnesses who reported to MPD that they
6 saw a van and three men located on the street outside the Medinas’ home on December 24, 2002,
7 including but not limited to:
8 a. Reports, interviews, audio and video recordings and transcripts
9 thereof (other than the hypnosis video which has already been provided to
10 the defense), written statements, or other documents related to the
11 eyewitness account provided by Diane Jackson indicating that she saw
12 three suspicious men with a van outside the Medina home or in the La
13 Loma neighborhood on December 24, 2002, including but not limited to:
14 i. Any attempted identifications by Ms. Jackson of the men
15 she reported seeing, and/or whether she saw Steven Todd,
16 Donald Glenn Pearce, and/or any other suspects potentially
17 involved in the Medina burglary;
18 ii. Any attempted identification of the van Ms. Jackson saw
19 parked on Covena Avenue on December 24, 2002, other
20 than the Martinez van, which she stated was not the van she
21 saw;
22 iii. Internal memoranda and/or correspondence regarding the
23 MPD’s decision to hypnotize Diane Jackson;
24 iv. Reports regarding contacts with Ms. Jackson indicating that
25 MPD’s decision to hypnotize her on January 17, 2003, was
26 a planned hypnosis interview and not a “cognitive”
27 interview that inadvertently resulted in hypnosis by an
28 interviewer, who was not qualified to conduct hypnosis, as
19
1 MPD later claimed in response to the defense’s Trombetta
2 motion, July 8, 2003.9
3 b. All reports, interviews, audio and video recordings and transcripts
4 thereof, statements, or other documents related to the information provided
5 by Linda Chilles, wife of former MPD Det. Nick Chilles who worked with
6 Det. Brocchini, indicating that around 9:30 a.m. on December 24, 2002,
7 she saw three men, “S1 was WMA, 30-40s, 5’11”, shoulder length dark
8 brown greasy hair, mustache, dark quilt type jacket. S2 was WMA 30–40
9 balding, medium build, flannel shirt. S3 she did not see well,” and a van
10 parked outside the Medina residence, and that the men acted suspicious,
11 including but not limited to:
12 i. All efforts MPD made to see if Ms. Chilles could identify
13 the men she reported seeing, and/or whether she saw Steven
14 Todd, Donald Glenn Pearce, and/or any other suspects
15 potentially involved in the Medina burglary;
16 ii. All efforts MPD made to see if Ms. Chilles could identify
17 the van she saw parked on Covena Avenue in front of the
18 Medinas’ home the morning of December 24, 2002;
19 iii. All reports, notes, or other documentation regarding Linda
20 Chilles’s contact with Det. Doug Ridenour on December
21 31, 2002, at which time she made a second attempt to report
22 the suspicious activity she saw. 10
23 c. All reports, interviews, audio and video recordings and written
24 transcripts thereof, statements, or other documents related to the tip
25
26 9
See Exh. 6 [Decl. of Gary Ermoian] ¶ 49, Exh. S [Ms. Jackson was informed by BPD on January 17, 2003,
that she would be hypnotized the following day indicating the hypnosis was planned and not inadvertent].
27
10
See Exh. 7 [Decl. of Paige McGrail] ¶¶ 5–10[Ms. Chilles reported she attempted at least twice to report the
28 information about the van and detailed descriptions of the men she had seen on Covena on December 24, 2002].
20
1 provided by Niniv T., indicating that he saw three Hispanic males 20s–
2 30s, standing outside near an older 1975–1980 van, white, full-sized, no
3 windows, possibly a Chevy van parked on the east side of Covena Avenue
4 in the afternoon on December 24, 2002, including but not limited to:
5 i. All efforts MPD made to see if this witness could identify
6 the men he reported seeing, and/or whether he saw Steven
7 Todd, Donald Glenn Pearce, and/or any other suspect
8 involved in the Medina burglary on Covena Avenue the
9 morning of December 24, 2002;
10 ii. All efforts MPD made to see if this witness could identify
11 the van he saw parked on Covena Avenue in front of the
12 Medinas’ home on December 24, 2002, which he described
13 in very specific detail.
14 d. All reports, interviews, recordings, statements, or other documents
15 related to the eyewitness account provided by Sean M., indicating that
16 around 3:30 p.m. on December 24, 2002, he saw three men wearing
17 stocking caps and sunglasses driving an older 70s van that drove past his
18 home in the La Loma neighborhood multiple times, and he saw the men
19 looking into windows of homes like they were looking for homes to
20 burglarize, including but not limited to any attempted identifications of the
21 van he observed.
22 e. All reports, interviews, audio and video recordings and transcripts
23 thereof, statements, or other documents related to the eyewitness account
24 provided by Kim V., who told police on January 1, 2003, that she saw an
25 older “two-toned beige van,” associated with three Hispanic men, who
26 frequently sold what appeared to her to be stolen goods from their van at
27 the corner of Yosemite Boulevard and Sante Fe Avenue, roughly two miles
28 from the Petersons’ home. This witness further reported that she had been
21
1 the victim of a burglary on December 21, 2002, and that she suspected the
2 van she described seeing might have been involved, and that after the
3 disappearance of Laci Peterson, the van she had seen at that corner stopped
4 showing up soon thereafter.
5 22. Reports, notes, audio and video recordings and transcripts thereof,
6 photographs, chain of custody logs, and/or other documents relating to the processing of the
7 Medina residence crime scene, collection of forensic evidence therefrom, and any subsequent
8 examination of that evidence, including but not limited to:
9 a. The chain of custody and present status of the gloves the Medinas
10 pointed out to Evidence ID Technician Doug Lovell and described as
11 having been handled by the person or persons responsible for burglarizing
12 their home;
13 b. The chain of custody and present status of any swabs collected from
14 the gloves described in (1) above;
15 c. Destruction orders for (1) and (2), in the event those items have
16 been destroyed;
17 d. Photographs of the Medina residence and of any evidence collected
18 therefrom;
19 e. Fingerprint examination reports by Evidence ID Technicians Doug
20 Lovell and Joy Smith and/or any other DNA, biological, or forensic
21 evidence collected from the Medina residence and/or their recovered
22 property;
23 f. Hairs, fibers, and/or other trace evidence, collected from the
24 Medina home;
25 g. Laboratory request forms or other correspondences requesting any
26 forensic testing on any evidence collected in relation to the Medina
27 burglary;
28
22
1 h. Lab reports and other reports, notes, and/or any documents
2 associated with forensic testing conducted on any evidence collected in
3 relation to the Medina burglary;
4 i. Destruction orders for all evidence collected in relation to the
5 investigation of the Medina burglary.
6 23. All reports, notes, interviews, audio and video recordings and transcripts
7 thereof, and/or other documents containing information regarding the identity of all confidential
8 informants utilized by law enforcement in the investigation of the Medina burglary, who may
9 have information regarding additional individuals associated with the Medina burglary, including
10 but not limited to:
11 a. Informant referenced in Off. Helton’s report (at Bates 2391);
12 b. Informant referenced in Off. Helton’s report (at Bates 2392);
13 c. Informant referenced in Det. Stough’s report (at Bates 20361);
14 d. Informant referenced in Det. Stough’s report (at Bates 20365);
15 e. Informant referenced in Agt. Brodie’s report (at Bates 20397); and,
16 f. Informant referenced in Det. Cloward’s report (at Bates 20393).
17 24. Reports, notes, audio and video recordings and transcripts thereof, and/or
18 other documents produced by MPD Off. Shawn Kelley and/or Off. John Sanchez related to the
19 drive taken with the confidential informant, in which the CI identified residences 1406 and 1407
20 Tenaya Avenue and Stephen Todd and Donald Glenn Pearce as being involved in the Medina
21 burglary.
22 25. All reports, notes, audio and video recordings and transcripts thereof,
23 and/or other documents related to the anonymous person who provided Oscar Souza and Mike
24 Brodie with the Tech 9 and 30-round magazine which had been stolen during the Medina
25 burglary, including but not limited to information identifying the anonymous person.
26 26. MPD Reports and other information confirming that Ralph G. is the MPD
27 confidential informant who notified the police on January 2, 2003, that Steven Todd, Donald
28
23
1 Glenn Pearce, and possibly one additional suspect named “Mark,” were responsible for the
2 Medina burglary, including but not limited to:
3 a. Ralph G.’s status as an MPD informant;
4 b. Information related to whether Ralph G. received a reward for the
5 information he provided to MPD regarding suspects in the Medina
6 burglary;
7 c. Ralph G.’s criminal history;
8 d. Ralph G.’s arrest report of January 3, 2002, and related booking
9 photos, custodial statements Ralph G. made to MPD, and audio and video
10 recordings and transcripts thereof, concerning Ralph G.’s knowledge of the
11 individuals involved in the Medina burglary and/or Laci Peterson’s
12 disappearance.
13 e. Ralph G.’s charging documents related to his arrest on January 3,
14 2003, for the receipt of stolen property, plea negotiations with MPD and
15 the Stanislaus County D.A.’s office, the factual basis for the plea Ralph G.
16 entered, and abstract of judgment related to his guilty plea.
17 27. MPD Reports, notes, audio and video recordings and transcripts thereof,
18 and/or other documents related to the information Det. Stough received about the possible
19 involvement of a “Mark” and other suspects, as indicated in Sgt. Helton’s reports, including but
20 not limited to:
21 a. Reports or other documentation relating to all MPD officers’ prior
22 contact with or knowledge of Mark T., which led them to suspect the tip
23 that a “Mark” was involved in the burglary was referring to Mark T.;
24 b. Reports, notes, photographs, recordings, search warrant(s), if any,
25 and other documents relating to the referenced “raid” of Mark T., including
26 any search warrant obtained and executed, and the return associated
27 therewith;
28
24
1 c. Reports, notes, and/or other documents regarding the individual
2 listed as “first name Gregg” interviewed by Agent Brodie, including his
3 full name and identifying information;
4 d. Reports, notes, interviews, recordings, and/or other documents
5 related to suspect “Vironi.”
6 e. Stanislaus County Jail Roster showing where Jason N. was in
7 custody from October 30, 2002–January 3, 2003. 11
8 28. A complete copy of the MPD and Stanislaus County District Attorney’s
9 Office case files related to the December 24, 2002 burglary of the Medina home at 516 Covena
10 Avenue (MPD Case #02-142591), including all audio and videotaped recordings and transcripts
11 of those recordings, reports, notes, interviews, evidence logs, correspondence and/or other
12 investigatory documents not yet requested above and not yet provided to Mr. Peterson, including
14 a. Diane Jackson
15 b. Linda Chilles
16 c. Niniv T.
17 d. Sean M.
18 e. Lillian V.
19 f. Kim V.
20 g. Robert Nickerson
21 h. Susan Medina
22 i. Rudy Medina
23 j. Steven Todd
24 k. Donald Glenn Pearce
25 l. Fred M.
26
27 11
Some of the individuals named herein, such as Jason N. and some of those listed infra, came to our attention
after Mr. Peterson sent a letter requesting informal discovery to the Stanislaus County District Attorney. Counsel
28 for Mr. Peterson will be happy to meet and confer to provide the complete names and other identifying informtion
to the prosecution, should the Court grant this motion.
25
1 m. Roy S.
2 n. Audrey N.
3 o. Lisa S.
4 p. Nicole E.
5 q. Elwin (Earl) D.
6 r. Delora W.
7 s. Paula C.
8 t. Eldon M.
9 u. Gregg C. or Gregg K.
10 v. Mark T.
11 w. Margaret P.
12 x. Kelly R.
13 y. Ralph G.
14 z. Buddy H.
15 aa. Cliff K.
16 bb. “Sanjeet”
17 cc. Telesia Koen
18 dd. Melissa M.
19 ee. Jason N.
20 ff. Richard C.
21 gg. Deanna R.
22 hh. Anthony S.
23 B. Lt. Xavier Aponte Reports
24 A complete copy of the MPD investigation into the exculpatory information CDCR Lt.
25 Xavier Aponte provided to MPD regarding Laci Peterson witnessing Steven Todd committing the
26 Medina burglary on December 24, 2002 (MPD Case No. 02-143025).
27
28
26
1 1. All audio recordings and transcripts of all calls Lt. Aponte made to MPD,
2 or any other law enforcement agency involved in the search for Laci Peterson, including but not
3 limited to the two calls Lt. Aponte described making in January–February 2003.
4 a. All MPD and other law enforcement agency reports, handwritten
5 and typed notes, call logs, audio and/or video recordings, voicemail
6 recordings, investigative materials, and/or any other documents regarding
7 the calls Lt. Aponte made to MPD, including but not limited to the two
8 calls Lt. Aponte described making in January–February 2003.
9 b. All telephone calls recorded between inmate Shawn Tenbrink,
10 while he was in custody in 2003, and his brother Adam and/or anyone in
11 the Tenbrink family, including but not limited to the call Lt. Aponte
12 described in his report to MPD.
13 c. All investigative actions MPD took in response to receiving the
14 information Lt. Aponte reported in his two calls to MPD, and any reports
15 and/or documents related thereto, including but not limited to:
16 i. The identity of the “unnamed” MPD detective who
17 interviewed Shawn Tenbrink in late January or early
18 February 2003 about Laci Peterson having seen Steven
19 Todd while the Medina burglary was in progress and who
20 thereafter directed Lt. Aponte to monitor Mr. Tenbrink’s
21 telephone calls;
22 ii. Phone records, reports, notes, audio recordings, email and
23 other written communications, and any other record
24 documenting every contact ever made between Lt. Aponte
25 and Det. Grogan and/or any other MPD detective and/or
26 MPD investigator and/or DA Investigator and/or any other
27 law enforcement officer, between January 2003 and today,
28 regardless of who initiated the contact;
27
1 iii. Reports, notes, and/or audio/video recordings and
2 transcripts thereof documenting the contents of a call, or
3 calls, made by the “unnamed” detective of the MPD, or any
4 other law enforcement representative, to Lt. Aponte or
5 California Rehabilitation Center (CRC) in Norco, in late
6 January or early February 2003, per Lt. Aponte’s signed
7 statements, or any time thereafter;
8 iv. Reports, notes, and/or audio and video recordings and
9 transcripts thereof of interviews by MPD and its
10 representatives, or any other law enforcement
11 representative or agent with Shawn Tenbrink when he was
12 incarcerated at the California Rehabilitation Center (CRC)
13 in Norco, California, regarding any issue, including
14 statements related to an individual with knowledge of or
15 confessing to committing the crimes for which Mr. Peterson
16 was convicted;
17 v. Reports and/or notes regarding the phone call placed by
18 Shawn Tenbrink to his mother indicating that he was
19 interviewed by police while incarcerated at CRC in Norco,
20 as indicated by Lt. Aponte’s December 1, 2004 statement,
21 and any other calls related to the Medina burglary or Laci
22 Peterson; and,
23 vi. Reports and/or notes regarding the monitoring and/or
24 surveillance of Shawn Tenbrink’s calls, mail, visits and/or
25 other activities while he was in custody at NORCO, as
26 indicated by Lt. Aponte in his signed statement of
27 December 1, 2004.
28
28
1 2. All materials related to Det. Craig Grogan’s search for materials related to
2 the Aponte reports, as detailed in Det. Grogan’s March 9, 2005 affidavit, including but not limited
3 to:
4 a. A complete and thorough description of all locations within the
5 MPD’s systems for cataloguing and storing reports, communications,
6 evidence, and other materials in serious felony cases, including
7 descriptions of how the above-described items are systematically managed
8 and preserved for retrieval, in compliance with law enforcement’s
9 discovery responsibilities and Brady obligations;
10 b. A complete and thorough description of all “computerized files”
11 Det. Grogan searched for “the tip listing Shawn Tenbrink referred to by the
12 defense,” and the search terms he used, as referenced in his March 9, 2005
13 affidavit; and,
14 c. A complete copy of all information and documents collected as a
15 result of a broad and complete search of all MPD systems, including but
16 not limited to which “computerized files” Det. Grogan searched and what
17 search terms were used in responding to the defense’s request for Brady
18 material, to which the defense is entitled. For example, searching for the
19 terms such as: Aponte, NORCO, Tenbrink, Adam, Shawn, Todd, among
20 many others, would be far more likely to return responsive results than
21 searching for precise language not designed to return responsive
22 information, as it appears Det. Grogan did.
23 3. A complete and thorough description of all “handwritten reports” that were
24 searched and reviewed by Det. Grogan for “reports mentioning Aponte or Tenbrink,” as
25 referenced in his March 9, 2005 affidavit.
26 4. All of the actual communications, correspondence, emails, voicemails,
27 recorded messages, and any other forms of requests Det. Grogan sent to Modesto Police
28 Department “detectives, officers, and supervisors involved in the Peterson investigation”
29
1 requesting “information about an interview between an officer or detective and Shawn Tenbrink,”
2 as referenced in Det. Grogan’s March 9, 2005 affidavit.
3 5. All of the actual communications, correspondence, emails, voicemails,
4 recorded messages, and any other forms of responses Modesto Police Department personnel or
5 any other law enforcement entity sent to Det. Grogan in response to his request for “information
6 about an interview between an officer or detective and Shawn Tenbrink,” as referenced in Det.
7 Grogan’s March 9, 2005 affidavit.
8 6. All of the actual correspondence between Det. Grogan and “supervisors in
9 the Investigative Services Unit” regarding whether the Modesto Police Department conducted
10 any interviews at the Norco facility related to the Laci Peterson case, as referenced in Det.
11 Grogan’s March 9, 2005 affidavit.
12 7. All communications and correspondence between the Modesto Police
13 Department and Lt. Aponte of CRC Norco, including but not limited to:
14 a. The actual fax, including any cover sheet and other information
15 Det. Grogan communicated to Lt. Aponte when he faxed him a copy of the
16 “tip sheet” in 2005, as referenced in Det. Grogan’s March 9, 2005 affidavit;
17 b. Lt. Aponte’s actual response(s) to Det. Grogan’s 2005 fax,
18 referenced in (1), whether by email, voicemail, fax, or any other means, as
19 indicated in Lt. Aponte’s March 3, 2005 declaration;
20 c. A digital copy and written transcript of the voicemail message(s)
21 left by Lt. Aponte with the Modesto Police Department tipline for the
22 investigation of the Laci Peterson case as referenced in Lt. Aponte’s March
23 3, 2005 declaration.
24 8. All communications and correspondence between the Modesto Police
25 Department and the CRC Norco regarding any of the following:
26 a. The information Lt. Aponte provided to MPD regarding Steven
27 Todd seeing Laci Peterson on the morning of December 24, 2002;
28
30
1 b. All recorded conversations between Shawn and Adam Tenbrink,
2 and recorded conversations between Shawn Tenbrink and his mother;
3 c. All interviews—telephonic, in-person, or otherwise—conducted
4 with Shawn Tenbrink, and audio and video recordings and transcripts
5 thereof;
6 d. Any other matter related to the Laci Peterson case or the Medina
7 burglary.
8 C. Croton Watch
9 1. A complete copy of the MPD and Stanislaus County District Attorney
10 Office’s investigation into the Croton watch that was pawned on December 31, 2002, by Deanna
11 R., and a watch that was pawned on February 14, 2003, by Anthony S.
12 2. All notes, reports, correspondence, and communications including written
13 correspondence, emails, voicemail recordings, faxes, photos, audio and video recordings, and
14 written transcripts thereof, related to the MPD’s (and/or any other law enforcement agency’s)
15 2004 investigation into the Croton watch Deanna R. pawned on December 31, 2002, and February
16 14, 2003.
17 3. All notes, reports, correspondence, photos, audio and video recordings, and
18 written transcripts thereof, photographs, and/or other documents related to law enforcement’s
19 interview(s) with Deanna R. and James B. regarding the Laci Peterson investigation, including
21 a. All reports and statements made by James B. and Deanna R. to law
22 enforcement regarding the Croton watch from 2003 to the present date,
23 including but not limited to their statements describing the watch that was
24 pawned before they were shown a photo of Laci’s Croton watch, and the
25 interview Inv. Mark Sanders conducted with James B. and Deanna R. when
26 he showed James B. a photograph of a watch and Deanna R. a photograph
27 of a watch;
28
31
1 b. All reports, notes, correspondence between Lt. Mark Smith and
2 Inv. Marc Sauders regarding the investigation into the Croton watch
3 Deanna R. pawned; and,
4 c. All photographs of watches Inv. Sanders showed to James B. and
5 Deanna R., including but not limited to the Croton watch.
7 written transcripts thereof, related to the February and/or early March 2003 interview MPD or
8 any other law enforcement agency conducted with Deanna R. at her residence on Rimrock,
9 Modesto, or at any other interview at any other time.
10 5. All notes, reports, correspondence, photos, audio and video recordings,
11 and written transcripts thereof, related to the surveillance MPD and/or other law enforcement
12 performed at Deanna R.’s Rimrock residence in 2003, including but not limited to surveillance
13 conducted by Officer Hicks.
14 6. Identify the “confidential reliable informant (CRI), known as ‘X,’” Officer
15 Hicks used to enter Deanna R.’s residence at Rimrock and purchase methamphetamine from
16 Deanna R.
18 written transcripts thereof, and/or other documents related to law enforcement’s interactions with
19 Sam N., and/or The Pawn Shop, between 2003 and the present date, regarding the Croton watch
20 Deanna R. pawned on December 31, 2002, and February 14, 2003, under the name of Anthony
21 S.
23 written transcripts thereof, and/or other documents related to the information James Romano
24 provided to the Modesto Police Department in 2004 regarding the abduction of Laci Peterson,
25 including, but not limited to:
26 a. All statements made by James Romano to law enforcement officers
27 and/or correctional facility staff regarding information he had relating to
28
32
1 the Laci Peterson investigation, including, but not limited to, his statements
2 made to:
3 i. Modesto Police Clerk Lisa McOwen;
4 ii. Stanislaus County Sheriff Dep. Terry Johnson;
5 iii. Modesto Police Department Det. Dodge Hendee;
6 iv. Stanislaus County Sheriff Sgt. Campbell;
7 v. Deputy Safford; and,
8 vi. Deputy Johnson.
9 9. All reports, memoranda, or other documents authored by individuals
10 relating to the information James Romano provided to law enforcement;
11 10. All notes, reports, statements, or other investigatory documents relating to
12 subjects named by James Romano in the report(s) he provided to law enforcement, including, but
13 not limited to:
14 a. James Romano;
15 b. James B.;
16 c. Michelene P.;
17 d. Anthony S.;
18 e. Curtis S.;
19 f. Tim S.;
20 g. Rayborn S.;
21 h. Deanna R.;
22 i. Jimmie G..
23 11. All audio and/or video recordings of interviews with James Romano,
24 James B., and Michelene P., and/or any other witness named in the information James Romano
25 provided to law enforcement;
26 12. All internal correspondence by and between law enforcement officers
27 and/or correctional facility staff regarding the information James Romano provided, including,
33
1 a. Sgt. Mike Zahr’s request to Lisa McOwen to have Det.
2 Hendee interview James Romano;
3 b. Lisa McOwen’s request to Det. Hendee to interview James
4 Romano;
5 c. Sgt. Campbell’s request to Deputy Safford to interview
6 James Romano; and,
7 d. Det. Dodge Hendee’s conversation with Det. George
8 Stough regarding his investigation into the Medina
9 burglary.
10 13. All reports, copies of correspondence, and other records documenting the
11 surveillance of James Romano’s outgoing mail while incarcerated at Stanislaus County Public
12 Safety Center between 2003–2004, including any letters in which James Romano indicated to
13 “Friends Outside” that he had information relating to the Laci Peterson investigation.
14 14. Booking photos of Anthony S., Curtis S., Deanna H., and James B. and the
15 “CDL photograph” of Michilene P. shown to James Romano on October 19, 2004.
16 15. All reports, communications, correspondence, photos, notes, audio and
17 video recordings and transcripts thereof, and/or other documents relating to all contacts between
18 MPD personnel and James B. in relation to the Laci Peterson investigation, including but not
19 limited to the incident in which he provided law enforcement with a pawn ticket for a watch made
20 out to Anthony S.
21 16. All reports, notes, correspondence, or other documents regarding any
22 contacts of MPD or other law enforcement related to the investigation into “The Pawn Shop,”
23 located at 1612 Oakdale Road, where James Romano indicated Deanna H. had pawned a watch,
24 in or around February 2003.
25 17. All reports, records, notes, correspondence, or other documents describing
26 all efforts made by law enforcement to identify a man who was in possession of items jewelry
27 from the Medina burglary and goes by the street name “Fireman.”
28
34
1 18. All statements by James Romano in his October 18, 2004 interview
2 identifying someone named “Coyle” as having been involved in the Medina burglary, as indicated
3 in his October 19, 2004 interview.
4 19. All records, reports, or other documents related to and/or describing or
5 summarizing James Romano’s criminal case history, including sentencing proceedings at the time
6 he came forward with information regarding the disappearance of Laci Peterson in 2004, as
7 represented to the Court by DDA David Harris at RT 19699.
8 D. December 25, 2002, Van Fire in Airport District
9 A complete copy of Modesto Police Department Case No. 02-142687 and Modesto Fire
10 Department (MFD) Case No. SMF02019142, concerning the investigation of an incendiary fire
11 of an orange van containing a mattress with apparent bloodstains, located in the alley between
12 612 Thrasher and 607 Empire, 12 less than one mile from the Petersons’ home, in the early morning
13 of December 25, 2002, the day after Laci Peterson was reported missing. The items requested
14 include but are not limited to the following:
15 1. Digital copies of all 911 calls reporting the incendiary vehicle fire in the
16 alley between 612 Thrasher and 607 Empire in Modesto the morning of December 25, 2002.
17 2. A complete color copy of the DOJ Central Valley Crime Laboratory file,
18 including but not limited to all bench notes, diagrams, DNA reports including electronic data, gas
19 chromatograms, photos, lab request forms, all documents regarding the examination and forensic
20 testing of all items of evidence collected from the van, including but not limited to the mattress
21 cutting, the rag collected from the fuel tank, any fingerprints and/or palm prints lifted from the
22 scene.
23 3. All reports, notes, correspondence, communications, audio and video
24 recordings and transcripts thereof, concerning the fire department and/or law enforcement’s
25 decision to send the stained mattress fabric found in the back of the van to the DOJ Central Valley
26 Crime Lab for forensic testing in 2003.
27
12
See Exh. 8 [Decl. of Mike Gudgell] ¶ 38 [attesting to the fact that 607 Empire was the address of Steven
28 Todd’s sister-in-law, Telesia Koen, the daughter of Cliff Koen, whose name Todd provided as his unverified alibi for
December 24, 2002].
35
1 4. All documents relating to the collection of fingerprints, palm prints, and/or
2 latent prints from the van, as requested in the Incident History Report and any subsequent
3 examination, analysis, or comparisons of that print evidence.
4 5. A complete color copy of MFD Fire Investigator Bryan Spitulski’s entire
5 investigation file in Modesto Fire Department Case No. SMF02019142.
6 6. Color copies of all “photographs” and “scene diagrams” created of the
7 orange van, the scene where it was located, and any/all evidence collected therefrom, including
9 a. Full-sized, color copies of the black and white thumbnails, titled
10 PC240013.jpg–PC240041.jpg;
11 b. All “scene diagrams” created by Fire Investigator Bryan Spitulski
12 and/or by any other investigator;
13 c. Color copies of all photographs of the orange van and its contents,
14 including the stained mattress, concrete cinder blocks, metal cans, and
15 other items located inside the van taken at the tow yard and MPD evidence
16 locker during the examination and collection of evidence from the van;
17 and,
18 d. Photographs depicting the cutting and sampling of the mattress
19 fabric at the “covered secure area.” 13
20 7. Property and Evidence logs and records, including chain of custody from
21 December 25, 2002, to the present, detailing the current location and condition of the following
22 items of evidence, and, where applicable, color photographs of the packaging, for the following
23 items:
24 a. The burned orange van with license plate number 6S66512;
25 b. The mattress fabric sample and other mattress material samples
26 collected from the above-described burned orange van;
27
13
See Exh. 9 [Decl. of Bryan Spitulski] ¶¶ 32–40 [sworn statement attesting to the details of the procedures
28 used and photographs taken during the examination and collection of evidence from the van while it was at the police
evidence locker].
36
1 c. The glass vile used for presumptive testing of the mattress fabric
2 sample, which tested presumptively positive for the presence of blood as
3 indicated in color photographs;
4 d. The red fuel container, metal fuel container, and yellow fuel
5 containers observed in the burned-out orange van;
6 e. The towel found sticking out of the gas tank of the burned-out van
7 described above;
8 f. The gas cap found lying on the ground near one of the tires of the
9 burned-out van described above;
10 g. The cement cinder blocks found inside the burned van;
11 h. The fabric cut from the “pillow”;
12 i. All other items collected from the van and/or the surrounding areas
13 not listed above.
14 j. All destruction orders associated with the van and/or evidence
15 collected therefrom.
16 8. MPD Policy and Training Manuals in effect in 2002–2005, including
17 Homicide Detective Manuals, Police Investigation Manuals, and any other policy and procedures
18 in effect governing the following:
19 a. Documentation, collection, and preservation of physical evidence;
20 b. Procedures for interviewing witnesses and suspects, including the
21 recording and documenting of such interviews;
22 c. The utilization and administration of hypnosis on eyewitnesses;
23 d. Avoiding confirmation bias and other biases in police investigations;
24 e. Documentation and disclosure of incentives offered to prosecution
25 witnesses in exchange for testimony;
26 f. All policies and procedures pertaining to the administration,
27 documentation, and recording of polygraphs, including pre-polygraph and
28 post-confession interviews; and
37
1 g. All policies and procedures pertaining to the use of confidential
2 informants, documentation of the identities of confidential informants,
3 decisions to offer leniency and/or deals in exchange for cooperation with
4 law enforcement, evaluation of Brady and discovery obligations when
5 using informants, and all other documents governing the use of
6 confidential informants.
7 9. MPD and MFD forensic evidence collection policies and procedures in
8 effect in 2002 and 2003.
9 10. The initial report(s) that MPD Evidence ID Tech Lovell’s “Supplemental
10 Report” supplements.
11 11. All notes, reports, emails, voicemail recordings, and/or other internal
12 communications between MPD and/or MFD personnel on December 31, 2002, regarding the
13 presumptive positive blood test result from the mattress fabric cutting, about which the police
14 chief, fire chief, and city manager were all informed and who then responded to the evidence
15 locker to view the evidence. 14
16 12. All MPD and MFD reports, notes, photos, audio and video recordings and
17 transcripts thereof, documenting and/or memorializing all investigatory actions taken in relation
18 to sightings of a similar van in the La Loma neighborhood, immediately prior to it being reported
19 on fire the morning of December 25, 2002, including but not limited to:
20 a. Mike Chiavette’s interview with MPD reporting that he saw a “bright
21 orange Blazer type vehicle in East La Loma Park” that resembled the color
22 of a “Cal Trans” van with suspicious looking men standing nearby, and
23 he also saw a dog he recognized as the Petersons’ dog, McKenzi, in the
24 park on the morning of December 24, 2002;
25 b. The report called in by Patty R., who informed MPD that on December
26 25, 2002, at 6:30 a.m., a “rust colored” van stalled out on her street in
27
14
See Exh. 9 [Decl. of Bryan Spitulski] ¶ 39 [sworn statement attesting to the fact that the described personnel
28 were present at the MPD evidence locker, while the van was being processed, because law enforcement believed the
van may have been involved in Laci Peterson’s abduction].
38
1 front of her home on Highland Drive, within 1,000 feet of the Petersons’
2 home, and a woman knocked on her door asking for gas, which her
3 husband provided to her;
4 c. All reports related to any investigatory efforts to obtain information
5 related to an “orange Blazer,” as indicated by the information called in by
6 Hession H., and all information and/or witness statements obtained
7 pursuant to those efforts.
8 13. All MPD and MFD reports, notes, photos, audio and video recordings and
9 transcripts thereof, documenting and/or memorializing all investigatory actions taken regarding
10 the theft of the orange van, prior to its burning, including, but not limited to:
11 a. Interviews with all witnesses, including but not limited to:
12 i. Terry Borden;
13 ii. Dorth Borden;
14 iii. Mark F. 15;
15 iv. Robert S. AKA Bobby R.; and,
16 v. Any of the other individuals encountered at the Borden
17 property on December 31, 2002.
18 b. All reports submitted by all MFD personnel present on the scene,
19 including but not limited to Bryan Spitulski, Matthew Curless, Michael
20 Peterson, Django Valledor, and Delbert Jolly;
21 c. Police and fire reports, notes, interviews, and/or other documents
22 concerning the theft of another vehicle or trailer from the Borden’s
23 business property roughly two weeks prior to the van fire on December 25,
24 2002, as Terry Borden relayed to Fire Investigator Bryan Spitulski;
25
26
27
15
The name “Mark F.” and a date of birth is listed as a name “to appear” in MFD Fire Inspector Spitulski’s
28 December 31, 2002 report. However, there is no mention of that name in the body of the report.
39
1 d. Investigation into all individuals who had access to the Borden van
2 prior to its apparent theft, including but not limited to a list of Borden’s
3 employees;
4 e. Investigation into whether the key to the van was with the van
5 and/or whether a copy of the key was in the possession of anyone
6 associated with the van;
7 f. Investigation into Robert S.’s (AKA Bobby R.) criminal history,
8 including the burglary he was on probation for, which rendered him
9 searchable, as indicated in Det. Shipley’s January 23, 2003 report;
10 g. All documents, audio and video recordings, inventory of evidence
11 collected related to MPD’s search of Robert S.’s residence, located on
12 River Road, on December 31, 2002, or any other date, in connection with
13 the investigation into the disappearance of Laci Peterson, the Medina
14 burglary, and/or the intentionally set van fire referenced above the morning
15 of December 25, 2002, including but not limited oto the “miscellaneous
16 tools, safe, and additional items” found in Robert S.’s possession on
17 December 31, 2002.
18 14. All reports, notes, recordings, or other documents detailing statements
19 made by witnesses at the scene of the van fire, including but not limited to the name and full
20 statement made by the reporting party, who stated that the van was not present in the alleyway
21 when he went to sleep the night before.
22 15. A complete and thorough description of all locations within the MFD and
23 MPD’s systems for cataloguing and storing reports, evidence, photos, and communications that
24 Det. Grogan searched for discovery that is responsive to Mr. Peterson’s request in 2016 for
25 investigation materials related to the van fire, including but not limited to:
26 a. All correspondence, including but not limited to email
27 communications, by and between District Attorney Birgit Fladager and
28
40
1 Det. Craig Grogan requesting a search for evidence related to the
2 incendiary van fire, as referenced in Det. Grogan’s 2016 report;
3 b. The complete MFD case file related to the investigation of the van
4 fire, MFD Case No. 02-19142, as referenced in Det. Grogan’s 2016 report;
5 c. The complete MPD case filed related to the investigation of the van
6 fire, MPD Case No. 02-142687, as referenced in Det. Grogan’s 2016
7 report;
8 d. Correspondence by and between Det. Grogan and the Department
9 of Justice Central Valley Crime Laboratory regarding the mattress cuttings,
10 as referenced in Det. Grogan’s 2016 report;
11 e. A complete copy of the Central Valley Crime Laboratory report
12 regarding the examination and forensic testing of the mattress cuttings,
13 including but not limited to serology testing and reports, bench notes, color
14 photographs, and all internal and external correspondence concerning the
15 testing of those items, as referenced in Det. Grogan’s 2016 report.
16 E. Eyewitnesses Who Reported Seeing Laci Peterson On or After December 24,
17 2002
18 1. All reports, audio and video recordings and transcripts thereof, photos,
19 notes, and/or other documents detailing investigative actions taken in response to eyewitness
20 accounts reporting sightings of Laci Peterson on or after December 24, 2002, including, but not
21 limited to:
22 a. Maps of search areas, the names of officers assigned, and the search
23 areas assigned to each officer. Materials developed or used by law
24 enforcement in 2002 and/or early 2003 while Laci was missing to note or
25 track possible December 24, 2002 neighborhood sightings of Laci,
26 McKenzi, or of a woman walking a dog.
27 b. All reports reflecting any interview(s) by Det. Reid or any other
28 officer with Colleen F., who reported to MPD on December 30, 2002, that
41
1 “[o]n 12/24 between 1000–1030 hrs she was backing out of her driveway
2 when she saw someone that looked like Laci.”
3 c. All reports reflecting any interview(s) regarding information
4 Homer and/or Helen Maldonado provided to Sgt. Ron Cloward on
5 January 3, 2003, while Laci was still missing, that Mr. Maldonado saw
6 Laci Peterson walking her dog in the La Loma neighborhood on December
7 24, 2002, and all reports reflecting any follow up interview regarding that
8 same information Homer and/or Helen Maldanado provided to MPD
9 Chaplain Crocker on January 14, 2003. 16
10 d. All reports reflecting any interview(s) while Laci was still missing
11 with Tony Freitas, who reported to MPD on December 30, 2002, that he
12 “[s]aw Laci on 12-24-02 about 10:00 a.m.” walking the dog in a northwest
13 direction on La Loma, near the location where Homer Maldonado reported
14 seeing Laci around that same time. 17
15 e. All reports reflecting any interview(s) while Laci was still missing
16 by Det. Grogan or any other officer to interview Sharon P., who reported
17 she “might have seen Laci Peterson” on La Loma just south of the bridge
18 “on Christmas Eve, not far from the location where Maldonado and Freitas
19 reported seeing Laci, the morning of December 24, 2002. 18
20 f. All reports reflecting any interview(s) while Laci was still missing
21 with Rebecca J., who reported on December 26 and 27, 2002 that her
22 neighbors at 215 Covena saw the “missing person walking her golden
23 retriever west on La Loma Ave near Santa Barbara.”
24 16
See Exh. 10 [Decl. of Homer Maldanado] ¶¶ 17–23 [sworn statement attesting to his multiple reports to MPD
25 that he saw Laci Peterson the morning of December 24, 2002].
26 17
See Exh. 11 [Decl. of Tony Freitas] ¶ 4 [sworn statement attesting to his reports to MPD that he saw Laci
Peterson the morning of December 24, 2002]
27
18
See Exh. 7 [Decl. of Paige McGrail] ¶¶ 11–16 [sworn statement attesting that Sharon P. recently confirmed
28 she believes she saw Laci Peterson on the morning of December 24, 2002, and that she reported it to MPD].
42
1 g. All reports reflecting any interview(s) while Laci was still missing
2 with Frank and Martha Aguilar at 215 Covena.
3 h. All reports reflecting any interview(s) while Laci was still missing
4 with Vivian (“Reagean” [sic]) Mitchell who called MPD on January 1,
5 2003, to report that on December 24, 2002, between 10:00 and 10:30 a.m.,
6 she “saw a lady who fits the description of Laci who was walking a golden
7 retriever.”
8 i. All reports reflecting any interview(s) while Laci was still missing
9 by Inv. Bertalotto or other officer with Gene Pedrioli who reported to
10 MPD that he saw Laci the morning of her disappearance on the west side
11 of the park with her dog. 19
12 j. All reports reflecting any interview(s) while Laci was still missing
13 with Rachel B., who reported seeing a woman walking her dog on Wilson
14 Avenue and “was yelling at her dog to ‘Come back, [c]ome back” because
15 the dog had gotten away from her.”
16 k. Det. Grogan’s notes or report detailing his December 26, 2002
17 interview with Mike Chiavette, as referenced by Detective Brocchini.
18 Chiavette reported seeing the Peterson’s dog being walked on the footpath
19 where Covena dead-ends.
20 l. All reports reflecting any interview(s) while Laci was still missing
21 by Det. Grogan or any other officer on the December 29, 2002 call from
22 city worker John Brazil, who reported seeing a white, pregnant woman
23 walking a dog in La Loma Park the morning of December 24, 2002.
24 m. All reports reflecting any interview(s) while Laci was still missing
25 with Thomas (“Tom”) Harshman, who reported to MPD on December
26 28, 2002, that he had just seen a pregnant woman fitting Laci’s description
27
19
See Exh. 8 [Decl. of Mike Gudgell] ¶ 67 [Pedrioli confirmed that he attempted to report to MPD that he had
28 seen Laci Peterson the morning of December 24, 2002].
43
1 who appeared to be under duress getting into a van on Scenic Road, near
2 Claus Road. 20
3 n. Any photos of Laci Peterson or other women used during
4 interviews with eyewitnesses to determine whether they saw Laci, or in the
5 alternative, identified another woman.
6 o. Any photos of the Peterson dog, McKenzi, or other dogs that were
7 used during eyewitness interviews to determine whether they saw
8 McKenzi, or in the alternative, identified another dog.
9 p. The identity of “two other pregnant women walking that day,” as
10 described by Det. Brocchini in his interview with Fox News Correspondent
11 Laura Ingle that aired March 30, 2023.
12 q. Notes of interviews with any eyewitnesses who reported seeing
13 Laci Peterson alive on December 24, 2002, in the possession of and/or
14 created by the Stanislaus County District Attorney’s Office.
15 F. Eyewitnesses Who Reported to MPD that They Had Seen the Petersons’ Dog,
16 McKenzi, Alone and Unattended in the La Loma Neighborhood the Morning
17 of December 24, 2004
18 1. All reports, audio and video recordings and transcripts thereof, reflecting
19 any interview(s) while Laci was still missing, with the following witnesses who called MPD and
20 reported seeing a dog fitting McKenzi’s description walking alone, unattended in the La Loma
21 neighborhood the morning of December 24, 2002:
22 a. Leora Garcia reported to the MPD on January 7, 2003, that she
23 was a driving instructor and was in the La Loma neighborhood the morning
24
25
26
20
See Exh. 19 to the Motion for DNA Testing, file herewith [Decl. of Tom Harshman] ¶¶ 3–6 [sworn statement
27 attesting that he saw Laci Peterson on December 28, 2002, getting into a van, and he reported the incident to MPD on
December 28, 2002, January 3, 2003, but no one from MPD called to interview him about his report until over a year
28 and a half later, on May 18, 2004].
44
1 of December 24, when she saw an older orange dog, by itself. 21 The dog
2 had a leash. On January 10, 2003, MPD Officer Hicks reported that he
3 called Ms. Garcia and spoke to her on the phone (i.e., without showing her
4 a photo of McKenzi) and he “determined [over the phone] that the dog was
5 not the same dog belonging to the Peterson.” Mr. Peterson has received
6 no discovery explaining on what basis the MPD determined the dog Ms.
7 Garcia saw was not McKenzi. 22
8 b. Victoria Pouches reported to MPD Officer R. Beffa on December
9 25, 2002, that she was jogging in the park the day before between 9:30 and
10 10:00 a.m. on December 24, and she saw a gold-colored dog with a leash
11 on. The dog was on the north side of Dry Creek, pacing back and forth and
12 barking “like crazy.” Pouches was contacted again on January 1, 2003, by
13 an officer doing a door-to-door canvas and she again reported that she saw
14 a large yellowish dog running loose in the park, north of the Covena dead
15 end (which is near the Petersons’ home). 23
16 c. Barbara B. called the MPD and reported that she had seen a golden
17 retriever-type dog with a red leash walking by itself at approximately 11:30
18 a.m.
19 d. John H. called MPD on December 27, 2002, to report that “a
20 couple of days ago,” he saw a large golden dog running around loose in the
21
21
See Exh. 6 [Decl. of Gary Ermoian] ¶ 42 [sworn statement attesting that Mr. Ermoian interviewed Ms.
22 Garcia and she provided a detailed statement regarding having seen the Petersons’ dog and a suspicious van new La
Loma park the morning of December 24, 2002].
23
22
On December 18, 2003, Officer Hicks conducted a follow up interview with Ms. Garcia. Although Mr.
24 Peterson is in possession of an audio recording of the interview, no report documenting the circumstances of that
interview or any follow up investigation into the information provided in that interview, including an additional
25 description of the van she saw and a partial license plate number, have been provided to the defense. Accordingly,
Mr. Peterson requests that the report corresponding to the December 18, 2003 interview and any related subsequent
26 investigation be provided.
27 23
See Exh. 7 [Decl. of Paige McGrail] ¶¶ 17–22 [sworn statement attesting that Ms. Pouches recently
confirmed she believes she saw the Petersons’ dog in La Loma Park on the morning of December 24, 2002, and that
28 she reported it to MPD].
45
1 Haddon area and that the dog was wearing a collar but he did not notice a
2 leash.
3 e. Linda S. called MPD on December 27, 2002, and reported that she
4 was out walking her dog two or three days prior and saw a golden retriever
5 with a collar and tags. The dog ran away from her.
6 G. Missing Bates Pages
7 There were at least two Bates numbering systems used in the discovery for this case, so
8 many discovery pages have two Bates stamps—one at the bottom right and one at top center. The
9 Bates number on the bottom right became the controlling Bates number and exceeded over 43,000
10 pages. Generally, the top center Bates was used by MPD for internal reports or documents filed
11 with internal reports. Based on this, please provide the following discovery, which has never to
12 date been provided to Mr. Peterson:
13 1. Pages that have a TOP CENTER Bates stamp number:
14 a. 2495 (likely handwritten);
15 b. 2592 (likely handwritten);
16 c. 12260–12265;
17 d. 14340–14402;
18 e. 16469–16491;
19 f. 17220–17595;
20 g. 25889;
21 h. 26712–26713.
22 2. Pages that have a BOTTOM RIGHT Bates stamp number:
23 a. 4759 (likely has handwritten 4751 at top center);
24 b. 5300–5309;
25 c. 10147;
26 d. 10652;
27 e. 10681–10684;
28 f. 15821;
46
1 g. 16220;
2 h. 16505–16509
3 i. 16523–16544 (likely has Bates 16469–16491 at top center);
4 j. 17272;
5 k. 20323–20324;
6 l. 21696–21697 (likely has Bates 21303–21304 at top center);
7 m. 22527;
8 n. 22871;
9 o. 23908–23909;
10 p. 25029;
11 q. 25315;
12 r. 26313–26314;
13 s. 26511;
14 t. 26771–26778;
15 u. 32850;
16 v. 32892;
17 w. 33770;
18 x. 34030–34031;
19 y. 35082;
20 z. 35088–35089;
21 aa. 37005;
22 bb. 38181;
23 cc. 38627–38629;
24 dd. 41297;
25 ee. 41737–41747 (likely has Bates 27817–27827 at top center);
26 ff. 42545;
27 gg. 42857–42903;
28 hh. 43084–43088;
47
1 ii. 43098–43152; and,
2 jj. 43214 and above.
3 H. Gene Ralston Reports, Videos, and Other Data Related to Bay Searches
4 1. Any reports or notes authored by MPD Sgt. Cloward, and/or
5 correspondence between Gene Ralston and Sgt. Cloward, regarding their mid-February 2003
6 discussion about an object captured by sonar imaging on January 24, 2003, that measured 5.3 feet
7 in length and appeared to have two small objects on opposite sides of one end, referenced in Gene
8 Ralston’s 2003 report.
9 2. All names of CARDA personnel and animals that “responded during the
10 weekend of March 6 and 7” to assist Ralston & Associates with searches, and all reports, notes,
11 logs, photos, and audio or video recordings detailing the searches and alerts that occurred during
12 this search.
13 3. Any photos or video footage obtained when Ralston suggested “the video
14 camera be used to tape the monitor output” that members of the search team viewed of the ROV
15 aboard the boat.
16 4. All video recordings made of Targets 1 and 2, referenced in the Ralston
17 report.
18 5. All screen captures, photos, or other images of the video images or video
19 of the object Gene Ralston considered to be of a human body at Target 1 or any other location.
20 6. Copies of any computer hard drives and/or computer files that contain the
21 images displayed by the ROV employed in connection with Gene Ralston’s searches in the bay
22 referenced in his 2003 Report.
23 7. Video of the Klamath County, Oregon, search locating victims which
24 Ralston believed resembled “the form and substance observed in the video of Target 1.”
25 8. Gene Ralston’s images and search data referenced in Det. Hendee’s report
26 dated July 31, 2003.
27
28
48
1 9. The 18 or 19 images sent to Clayton Fenn of Interspace Exploration,
2 including images from March 12–13, 2003, that Ralston thought were images of a body,
3 referenced in Det. Hendee’s report dated July 31, 2003.
4 10. All side scan sonar images and video taken on March 28 and 29, 2003
5 referenced in Gene Ralston’s 2003 report.
6 11. All communications and correspondence from January 1, 2003, to date,
7 including but not limited to email correspondence and text messages, between MPD, including
8 Sgt. Ron Cloward, and Gene or Sandra Ralston, concerning any evidence in this case and the
9 search for Laci Peterson.
10 12. All communications and correspondence from January 1, 2003, to date,
11 including but not limited to email correspondence and text messages, between any personnel from
12 other agencies and/or other parties involved in the San Francisco Bay searches and Gene or
13 Sandra Ralston. (See Exh. 5 to the Motion for DNA Testing [Decl. of Paige McGrail] ¶ 4, Exh.
14 A [Gene Ralston’s 2003 report, referencing “intermittent contact with several other officers and
15 detectives throughout the investigation”].)
16 13. All MPD reports, notes, memoranda, and communications with other law
17 enforcement agencies involved in underwater searches in San Francisco Bay, discussing the
18 merits of Mr. Ralston’s opinion that Laci Peterson’s body was not deposited in the location MPD
19 and the prosecution claimed and the reasons for rejecting his opinion. Mr. Peterson has received
20 no discovery regarding this topic.
21 I. All Reports, Videos, and Other Data Related to Bay Searches
22 1. MPD Sgt. Ron Cloward’s report detailing his activities at the San
23 Francisco Bay on March 11, 2003.
24 2. MPD Det. Owen’s report detailing his activities at the San Francisco Bay
25 on March 11, 2003, as referred to in Det. Grogan’s report.
26 3. Report obtained from Deputy Rick Rutherford of Tuolumne County
27 detailing his activities at the San Francisco Bay on March 11, 2003.
28
49
1 4. MPD Det. Phil Owen’s report detailing the activities at the San Francisco
2 Bay on March 17, 18, and 19, 2003.
3 5. All of MPD Det. Grogan’s communications with the FBI regarding
4 underwater searches conducted in San Francisco Bay.
5 6. All photos, images, video, reports taken by John Demille from Marine
6 Sonic on May 22, 2003. 24
7 7. All reports from law enforcement personnel or others assisting law
8 enforcement in the San Francisco Bay searches, including from the following personnel who were
9 present during the searches, none of whom have provided any reports to Mr. Peterson about their
10 search activities:
DATE AGENCY PERSONNEL PRESENT,
11
REPORT PROVIDED
12 12/28/2002 Contra Costa Sheriff’s Department Tom Gill
Mike Boehrer
13 Jim Lambert
14 Chris Lauitzen
John Humphrey
15 Ed Malascon
Charlie Rojas
16 Eloise Anderson
17 Marine Unit
Marine Patrol Unnamed
18 California Rescue Dog Association Denise Blackman
Ron Seitz
19
Eloise Anderson
20 Modesto Police Department Marine Dept.
K-9 Officers
21 Alameda County Sheriff’s Ron Seitz
22 Department
Richmond Police Department J. Silva
23 San Francisco Police Department Marine Unit
12/30/2002 Modesto Police Department Andy Schlenker
24 Rick Armendariz
25 12/31/2002 Coast Guard “Petty Officer Castillo”
Ken Langford
26 Jeff Bouchey
27
28 24
Mr. Peterson has received discovery labeled Day 1 through Day 3 and Day 5, but is missing anything related
to Day 4 or May 22, 2003 from John Demille.
50
01/04/2003 Alameda County Sheriff’s R. Seitz
1
Department Search and Rescue B. McCabe
2 R. Soares
D. Lee
3 Storck
4 G. Chiu
Miller
5 M. Wagner
B. Weber
6 F. Roelfsema
7 M. Noms
R. Carlson
8 Z. Helstrom
J. Millie
9 Hart
10 Alameda County Sheriff’s J. Nagel
Department Underwater J. McPartland
11 Rescue/Recovery T. Cahil
D. Garabedian
12 B. Matapoulos
13 R. Pokomy
R. Valerio
14 D. Branson
Alameda County Sheriff’s D. Edick
15
Department “m u-9” G. Gleeson
16 01/08/2003 San Mateo Sheriff’s Department Walter Williams
Geoffrey Baehr
17 George Carey
18 Sgt. Gonzales
Ken Ardens
19 Thomas McEvoy
01/09/2003 San Mateo Sheriff’s Department Walter Williams
20 Geoffrey Baehr
21 George Carey
Sgt. Gonzales
22 Ken Ardens
Thomas McEvoy
23
Modesto Police Department Ron Cloward
24 Alameda County Sheriff’s R. Knabe
Department Search and Rescue E. Sheets
25 B. Jenevein
J. Miille
26
C. Miller
27 B. Weber
S. Corey
28 A. Rateaver
51
J. Nichols
1
M. Wagner
2 A. Bach
Z. Helstrom
3 M. Norris
4 P. Sales
R. Soares
5 D. Lee
R. Seitz (SAR Chief)
6 K. Crawford
7 M. Caunday
J. Ward
8 R. Wagner
D. Brown
9 Alameda County Sheriff’s G. Battaglia (URU Chief)
10 Department Underwater D. McMurdie
Rescue/Recovery D. Fugere
11 R. Happ
J. Bryan
12 D. Brown
13 D. Panzica
R. Storer
14 A. Zafers
J. Bueno
15
N. Lann
16 R. Fish
Alameda County Sheriff’s J. Wolfe
17 Department “mu-11”
18 01/11/2003 San Mateo Sheriff’s Department Walter Williams
Geoffrey Baehr
19 George Carey
Sgt. Gonzales
20 Ken Ardens
21 Thomas McEvoy
Modesto Police Department Mike Zahr
22 Chris Fuzie
Jason Grogan
23 Ron Cloward
24 Carlos Rodriguez
Veronica Holmes
25 Berkeley Police Department Eric Gustafson
Ed Galvan
26
G. Craig
27 Stanislaus County District Attorney Birgit Fladager
Rick Distasso
28
52
Alameda County Sheriff’s Darryl Brown
1
Department P. Sales
2 Andrea Zaferes
Alameda County Sheriff’s A. Chew
3 Department Search and Rescue R. Collins
4 L. Wilcox
R. Knabe
5 K. Crawford
K. Jones
6 D. Gallagher
7 S. League
B. Weber
8 R. Bedford
J. Nichols
9 K. Laidlaw
10 Z. Helstrom
P. Miyashiro
11 D. Dong
R. Soares
12 J. Ward
13 T. Allread
D. Lee
14 E. Sheets
M. Norris
15
A. Wright
16 R. Ericson
Alameda County Sheriff’s J. Pacheco
17 Department “mu-11” N. Neil
R. Storer
18
D. McMurdle
19 J. Bryan
M. Vail
20 B. Bussell
21 D. McCormick
J. Wolfe
22 F. Butler
B. Bennett
23 Alameda County Sheriff’s R. Fish
24 Department Underwater Rescue and R. Happ
Recovery S. Sutton
25 J. Bueno
Solano County Sheriff’s Chris Cook
26
Department
27 U.S. Coast Guard Unnamed
San Mateo Sheriff’s Department Unnamed
28 01/24/2003 Modesto Police Department Mike Zahr
53
Ron Cloward
1
Berkeley Police Department Ed Galvan
2 G. Craig
01/27/2003 U.S. Coast Guard Ken Langford
3 Paula Andrieu
4 Jonathan Wall
5 Skultety
01/28/2003 U.S. Coast Guard Ken Langford
6 Paul Andrieu
7 Jonathan Wall
02/01/2003 Modesto Police Department C. Ramirez
8 San Mateo Sheriff’s Department Walter Williams
Mike Otte
9
Sean MacDonald
10 Geogg Barie
Joan Hooper
11 Tom McEvoy
12 George Carey
San Francisco Police Department Danny Lopez
13 San Mateo Sheriff’s Department, Tom Smith
“EOD,” “Marine Three” Mark Flaherty
14 Mark Potter
15 Capt. Williams
02/02/2003 San Mateo Sheriff’s Department, Tom Smith
16 “EOD,” “Marine Three,” “Cliff and Dino Zografos
Water Rescue Team” Mark Potter
17
Capt. Williams
18 Tom McEvoy
Walt Williams
19 Geoffrey Barie
George Carey
20
Joan Hooper
21 Modesto Police Department Ron Cloward
22 02/03/2003 Regional Parks Police Randy Parent
23 Kevin Iacovoni
24 Craig Grogan
Rudy Skultety
25 Veronica Holmes
26 California Highway Patrol Russ Vough
David Power
27 02/08/2003 San Francisco Police Department Greg Latus
28
54
California Rescue Dog Association; Billy Wong
1
Alameda County Rescue Dogs, Mary Wong
2 “OES” Denise Blackman
Berkeley Police Department Ed Galvan
3 San Mateo Sheriff’s Department Walter Williams
4 Geoff Barie
Tom McEvoy
5 George Carey
02/09/2003 Modesto Police Department Ron Cloward
6 Phil Owen
7 San Mateo Sheriff’s Department Tom McEvoy
Walt Williams
8 Geoffrey Barie
Joan Hooper
9
San Francisco Police Department Mark Potter
10 Jay Dowke
Tom Smith
11 Danny Lopez
12 Private Search Party Don Laughlin
William Laughlin
13 02/16/2003 San Mateo Sheriff’s Department Jeff Bare
W. Williams
14 George Carey
15 John Drews
02/20/2003 Modesto Police Department Mike Zahr
16 – Ron Cloward
02/21/2003 San Francisco Police Department Danny Lopez
17
Greg Latus
18 Mark Laherly
Mike Stasco
19 Darby Reid
Jason Sawyer
20
Lian Frost
21 John Ferrando
Nick Rainford
22 02/23/2003 San Mateo Sheriff’s Department Jeff Bare
23 – W. Williams
02/25/2003 George Carey
24 John Drews
25 San Francisco Police Department Danny Lopez
26 Mark Laherly
Greg Latus
27 Mike Stasco
Darby Reid
28
Jason Sawyer
55
Liean Frost
1
John Fernando
2 Nick Rainford
Jason Gardon
3 Jay Dowke
4 San Mateo Police Department Walt Williams
03/01/2003 California Rescue Dog Association Phil Wong
5 – San Mateo Sheriff’s Department John Koerner
03/04/2003 Walt Williams
6 25
Modesto Police Department Ron Cloward
7 Derrick Tyler
Larry Meyer
8 Sonar Technician Don Laughton
Tuolumne County Sheriff’s Rich Rutherford
9
Department Bob Steel
10 John Zeeman
Richmond Police Department Joel Thompson
11 Rebecca Ireland
12 03/11/2003 Modesto Police Department Ron Cloward
26
Phil Owen
13 Tuolumne County Sheriff’s Unnamed
Department
14
27
15
16 Carlos Ramirez
Phil Owen
17
Tuolumne County Sheriff’s Rick Rutherford
18 Department Bob Steele
Norman Bettencourt
19 San Francisco Divers Unnamed
20 03/17/2003 Modesto Police Department Phil Owen
– Ron Cloward
21 03/19/2003 Carlos Ramirez
Tuolumne County Sheriff’s Unnamed
22
Department Dive Team
23
24 25
These searches are grouped together as a range between March 1–4, 2003, as the dates on the reports in Mr.
Peterson’s possession contradict one another, making it unclear on which days these searches actually occurred.
25 Accordingly, Mr. Peterson requests that all reports for the named individuals in this date range be produced.
26 26
For this date, Mr. Peterson has only a single report from Det. Grogan recounting a phone briefing about the
bay search from Sgt. Cloward. Mr. Peterson has no reports from anyone actually present at the bay that day.
27
27
As with March 11, 2003, the only report Mr. Peterson is in possession of dealing with the bay search on
28 March 12, 2003, is a phone briefing for Det. Grogan.
56
1
– Rudy Skultety
2 03/27/2003 Veronica Holmes
3 Mark Tozer
4 Greg Latus
Tuolumne County Sheriff’s Rick Rutherford
5 Department Scott Johnson
Jeff Perlewitz
6 Greg Wolf
7 U.S. Coast Guard Sal Rodriguez
In Shore Divers Kevin Pehle
8 Gene Purtell
Shane Hunter
9
03/28/2003 Modesto Police Department Rudy Skultety
10 R. Pouv
Derek Tyler
11 California Rescue Dog Association Unnamed
12 03/29/2003 San Mateo Sheriff’s Department John Koerner
Modesto Police Department Derrick Tyler
13
14 J. Computer Forensics
15 Mr. Peterson requests all reports, notes, communications, analysis, and other discovery
16 regarding Det. Grogan’s determination that Mr. Peterson turned his computer on at the office in
17 his warehouse at approximately 10:00 a.m. on December 24, 2002. Mr. Peterson was not
18 provided with any computer forensic reports indicating what time he turned his work computer
19 on at his office on December 24, 2002.
20 K. Scent Dogs
21 Mr. Peterson requests all notes, reports, communications, memoranda, audio and video
22 recordings, and other records documenting MPD’s use of scent dogs in the search for Laci
23 Peterson in 2002 and 2003, including but not limited to the following:
24 1. All notes, audio and video recordings, photos, drawings, maps, reports,
25 recorded radio transmissions, voicemails, and other communications between MPD and Contra
26 Costa Sheriff’s Department Search and Rescue scent dog handler Cindee Valentin related to her
27 scent dog Merlin’s search on the evening of December 26, 2002, that commenced at 523 Covena
28 Avenue and was terminated in the Airport District.
57
1 2. All audio and video recordings, photos, drawings, maps, reports, recorded
2 radio transmissions, voicemails, and other communications between MPD and Contra Costa
3 Sheriff’s Department Search and Rescue dog handler Cindee Valentin related to her scent dog
4 Merlin’s search on the evening of December 26, 2002, that occurred in the vicinity of 1027 N.
5 Emerald Avenue.
7 radio transmissions, voicemails, and other communications between MPD and Contra Costa
8 County Sheriff’s Department Search and Rescue dog handler Eloise Anderson related to her
9 cadaver dog Twist’s search of Mr. Peterson’s truck on December 27, 2002, and Det. Hendee’s
10 decision that a cadaver dog should not be put into the Petersons’ truck as part of MPD’s
11 investigation into Laci Peterson’s disappearance, despite law enforcement’s suspicion that Mr.
12 Peterson transported his wife’s body in the back of his truck.
14 radio transmissions, voicemails, and other communications not previously provided in discovery
15 related to the many cadaver dog alerts that occurred on the San Francisco Bay during the
16 underwater searches from January through October 2003, including the searches Mr. Ralston and
17 numerous law enforcement agencies participated in around Buoy 4.
19 radio transmissions, voicemails, and other communications documenting the activities of scent
20 and cadaver dogs deployed at the Berkeley Marina, including reports by all witnesses who
21 observed the scent dog alerting to Laci’s scent on the west dock, rather than on the east dock,
22 where Mr. Peterson tied up his boat when he put it boat in the water on December 24, 2002.
23 L. Modesto Police Department and Stanislaus County District Attorney Office
24 Policies in Place in 2002–2005 Governing Disclosure of Conflicts of Interest
25 Concerning Personal and/or Romantic Relationships Between Prosecutors
26 and Law Enforcement Officials Working on the Same Case
27 Mr. Peterson requests the following:
28
58
1 1. MPD policy manuals, human resources policies and procedures for
2 employees, and all other information setting forth the policies in place in 2002–2005 requiring
3 that management be notified of any personal and/or romantic relationship with another member
4 of law enforcement, including employees of the Stanislaus County District Attorney’s Office, for
5 purposes of avoiding a conflict of interest.
6 2. Stanislaus County District Attorney’s Office policy manuals, human
7 resources policies and procedures for employees, and all other information setting forth the
8 policies in place in 2002–2005 requiring that management be notified of any personal and/or
9 romantic relationship with another member of law enforcement, including employees of MPD,
10 for purposes of avoiding a conflict of interest. 28
11 3. Policies in place at MPD and/or the Stanislaus County District Attorney’s
12 Office from 2002–2005 governing the handling of conflicts of interest, including the disclosure
13 to defendants of personal and/or romantic relationship between a member of law enforcement
14 investigating a defendant’s case and a trial prosecutor, including but not limited to the notification
15 requirement when a trial prosecutor is involved with an investigating officer she calls to the stand
16 and examines as part of the prosecution’s case in chief. 29
17 4. All disclosures provided and waivers sought by MPD and/or Stanislaus
18 County District Attorney’s Office informing Mr. Peterson’s defense of any conflicts of interest
19 among trial prosecutors and testifying MPD officers.
20 M. Any New Reports, Leads, Evidence, or Tips Received by MPD or Any Other
21 Law Enforcement Agency Since the Date of Mr. Peterson’s Conviction
22 28
See National District Attorneys Association, National Prosecution Standards (3rd ed. 2009) 1–3.3(d)
23 [Specific Conflicts: “The prosecutor should excuse himself or herself from any investigation, prosecution, or other
matter where personal interests of the prosecutor would cause a fair-minded, objective observer to conclude that the
24 prosecutor’s neutrality, judgment, or ability to administer the law in an objective manner may be compromised.”]; 1–
3.4 [Conflict Handling “Each prosecutor’s office should establish procedures for handling actual or potential conflicts
25 of interest. These procedures should include, but are not limited to: a. The creation of firewalls and taint or filter
teams to ensure that prosecutors with a conflict are not improperly exposed to information or improperly disclose
26 information; and b. Methods to accurately document the manner in which conflicts were handled to ensure public trust
and confidence in the prosecutor’s office” (emphasis added).].
27
29
See Exh. 8, Decl. of Mike Gudgell [sworn statement attesting that persons with knowledge have reported to
28 him that at the time of Mr. Peterson’s trial in 2004 and 2005, MPD Det. Craig Grogan and DDA Birgit Fladager were
involved in a romantic relationship].
59
1 Identifying Individuals Other than Mr. Peterson as Possibly Involved or
2 Responsible for the Disappearance and Deaths of Laci and Conner Peterson
3 This was among the information requested by previous counsel before the prosecution
4 decided not to retry the penalty phase and to stipulate to resentencing Mr. Peterson to life without
5 the possibility of parole. Mr. Peterson has not received a response to this request.
6 N. Audio and Video Recordings of MPD Interviews With and Surveillance of
7 Scott Peterson and Transcripts Thereof, Not Yet Provided
8 Mr. Peterson requests the following:
9 1. All audio and video recordings of MPD’s interviews with Mr. Peterson
10 beginning December 24, 2002, through April 30, 2003, including but not limited to the following:
11 a. Interviews various MPD officers conducted with Mr. Peterson on
12 December 24, 2002, beginning at approximately 6:30 p.m. up to Det.
13 Brocchini’s videotaped interview with him at MPD, which has been
14 provided to the defense. This request includes recordings made in Det.
15 Brocchini’s official vehicle while he was driving Mr. Peterson around
16 Modesto on the evening of December 24, 2002, and interviewing him
17 throughout that time;
18 b. Interviews MPD officers, including Det. Craig Grogan, conducted
19 with Mr. Peterson on December 25, 2002, while Mr. Peterson was at the
20 MPD located in various rooms, including interview rooms. This request
21 includes all recordings of the pre-polygraph interview Doug Mansfield
22 conducted, or attempted to conduct, on that date.
23 c. Video recordings made by cameras at the MPD lobby, captured at
24 approximately 4:00–5:00 p.m. on December 25, 2002, showing Lee and
25 Jackie Peterson asking for their son to be released from custody;
26 d. Interviews MPD officers, including Chris Boyer, Craig Grogan,
27 Allen Brocchini, and others, conducted with Mr. Peterson at his home prior
28 to executing search warrants on his property on December 26, 2002;
60
1 e. Interviews MPD officers, including Det. Craig Grogan, conducted
2 with Mr. Peterson on January 3, 2003, while he was in various interview
3 rooms at MPD.
4 f. Interviews MPD officers, including Det. Craig Grogan, conducted
5 with Mr. Peterson on January 3, 2003, while he was being transported to
6 and from a facility to provide biological samples, and while he was being
7 searched, fingerprinted, and photographed pursuant to a search warrant.
8 2. All audio and video recordings of MPD’s surveillance of Mr. Peterson
9 beginning December 24, 2002, through April 30, 2003, not yet provided, including but not limited
10 to video recordings captured by the pole camera MPD surreptitiously placed outside the
11 Petersons’ home in December 2002–January 2003.
12 O. Tracy Tip
13 All audio and video recordings of the call MPD received on January 10, 2003, reporting
14 as follows (Bates 15137):
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22 All investigation reports, police reports, witness statements, recorded statements,
23 photographs, and any other information obtained by San Joaquin County law enforcement who
24 looked for the location described in the tip. Mr. Peterson is requesting any and all reports from
25 San Joaquin County Sheriff’s Department Deputies M. Smith, S. Steward, and R. Gillingwater;
26 San Joaquin County Sherriff’s Department Air One flyover using the heat sensor; and Alameda
27 County Sheriff’s Department Deputy Hesselein.
28
61
P. Current Evidence/Property & Chain of Custody Logs for All Evidence Items
Mr. Peterson requests current Property & Evidence Logs, Inventory Logs, Chain of
Custody Logs, and all other related documents reecting the status and custody of all evidence
items collected in this case from December 24, 2002, to the present.
***
Mr. Peterson is entitled to the discovery requested in this motion under Penal Code
section 1054.9. He is also entitled to the requested discovery, to the extent it has exculpatory
value, under the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
(Brady v. Maryland (1963) 373 U.S. 83, 87; see also United States v. BagIey (1985) 473 U.S.
667, 675, 680; Giglio v. United States (1972) 405 U.S. 150; People v. Whalen (2013) 56 Cal.4th
1, 64; Strickler v. Greene (1999) 527 U.S. 263, 281.)
IV. CONCLUSION
~
Based on the foregoing, Mr. Peterson respectfully requests this Court grant this motion
and order the prosecution to conduct a thorough and sweeping search of its les and provide Mr.
-~
Peterson, through his counsel the Los Angeles Innocence Project, with discovery as requested
herein, without delay.
Dated: Januar3l_, 2024 Respectful] submi ed,
By
aula Mitchell
Attorney for Scott Peterson
NNNNNNNNN
62
Case No.: SC055500A — The People v. Scott Peterson
EXHIBIT 11
EXHIBIT
Declaration of Paula M. Mitchell
1 DECLARATION OF PAULA M. MITCHELL
2 I, Paula M. Mitchell, hereby state and declare,
3 1. I am the Director of the Los Angeles Innocence Project (LAIP), a non-profit law
4 firm associated with the California Forensic Science Institute (CFSI) at Cal State L.A.'s School
5 of Criminal Justice and Criminalistics, located at the Hertzberg-Davis Forensic Science Center in
6 Los Angeles. LAIP represents individuals with claims of actual innocence and is a member of
7 the Innocence Network, a coalition of organizations dedicated to providing pro bono legal and
8 investigative services to individuals seeking to prove claims of innocence for crimes for which
9 they have been convicted, working to redress the causes of wrongful convictions, and supporting
10 the exonerated after they are free.

11 2. I am an attorney licensed to practice law in all courts in the State of California. I
12 am also licensed to practice law in New York and the District of Columbia, and I am admitted
13 before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third, Fourth, Sixth, N inth, Tenth, and Eleventh Circuits,
14 as well as the U.S. Supreme Court. I have assisted in overturning wrongful convictions of
15 individuals who have cumulatively spent nearly 250 years in prison for murders and other serious
16 violent felonies they did not commit.
17 3. In March 2023, I was contacted by Scott Peterson's prior counsel at Habeas Corpus
18 Resource Center (HCRC) and asked if LATP would be in a position to investigate potentially
19 exculpatory DNA evidence in Mr. Peterson's case. Over the fo llowing months, I instructed,
20 assisted, and supervised LAIP staff attorneys in assembling the voluminous discovery ( over
21 40,000 pages) and the trial and appellate record in Mr. Peterson's case, in an effort to recreate the
22 police investigation file and related crime lab reports and trial counsel fi les.
23 4. LAIP staff attorneys and I also contacted Mr. Peterson's pnor counsel and
24 obtained from them Mr. Peterson's case materials that were in their custody, possession, and
25 control.
26 5. On April 19, 2023, Mr. Peterson fi led a prose Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus
27 in the California Court of Appeal, First Appellate District, Case No. A 167615, asserting violations
28
DECLARATTONARATlON OF PAULA M. MITCHELL

1 of state and federal constitutional rights and state statutory rights, including Brady claims and a
2 claim of actual innocence that is supported by newly discovered evidence.

3 6. In the course ofLAIP's review and after some preliminary investigation, it became
4 apparent to me that numerous items referred to throughout the police reports in Mr. Peterson's
s case were not included in the discovery that was provided to the defense at the time of trial and
6 that a motion for post-conviction discovery pursuant to Penal Code section 1054.9 would need to
7 be filed.
8 7. On November 13, 2023, the Court of Appeal granted Mr. Peterson's request that I
9 be substituted in to represent him in the pending habeas proceedings and, on November 14, 2023,
10 I filed a request in the Court of Appeal asking that informal briefing in the pending habeas
11 proceedings be suspended to allow counsel sufficient time to conduct further investigation into
12 the claims raised therein, including the need to fi le a post-conviction discovery motion pursuant
13 to Penal Code section 1054.9, which the Court of Appeal granted on December 1, 2023.
14 8. On November 14, 2023, I sent a letter to the District Attorney of Stanislaus
1s County, Jeff Laugero, seeking his office's position on our request for specific items of post-
16 conviction discovery that Petitioner is entitled to under Penal Code section 1054.9, which have
17 never been provided. A redacted copy of that letter is attached hereto as Exh. A. 1 D.A. Laugero
18 responded via email that same evening, stating that the original trial prosecutors on Mr. Peterson's
19 case-Birgit Fladager and Dave Harris- were still assigned to the Peterson case and would be
20 the points of contact in this case.
21 9. On November 15, 2023, I replied to D.A. Laugero, urging him to reconsider his
22 decision to assign the original trial prosecutors to Mr. Peterson's case as it is no longer considered
23 best practices to ask trial prosecutors to investigate and review their own convictions in cases
24 where a claim of innocence is asserted and particular!y where there are allegations of prosecutorial
2s misconduct involved. The email exchanges of November 14- 15, 2023, are attached hereto as
26 Exh. B.
27
28
An unredacted copy of the letter is lodged with Mr. Peterson's Motion to File Under Seal.
DECLARATIONARATION OF PAULA M. MITCHELL
2
1 10. On December 1, 2023, the Court of Appeal granted Mr. Peterson's request to
2 suspend informal briefing in the pending habeas proceedings to allow him time to file the instant
3 post-conviction motions for discovery and DNA testing. The Court of Appeal's order is attached
4 hereto as Exh. C.
5 11. On December 14, 2023, Stanislaus County Special Prosecutor Birgit Fladager,
6 who was one of the original trial prosecutors at Mr. Peterson's trial, responded to my letter of
7 November 14, 2023, requesting informal discovery. Ms. Fladager stated that "there is no informal
8 discovery process provided for under Penal Code section 1054.9," and that her office would
9 respond to Mr. Peterson's discovery requests "in due course." Ms. Fladager's letter is attached
1o hereto as Exh. D.
11 12. Given the six-month time constraint Mr. Peterson is laboring under due to the
12 pending petition in the Court of Appeal, our need to obtain the requested discovery so we can
13 continue our investigation into Mr. Peterson' s claim of innocence, and the Stanislaus County
14 District Attorney's Office's representation that there is no informal discovery process pursuant to
15 Penal Code section 1054.9, I am fi ling the instant motion to seek court enforcement of the post-
16 conviction discovery process.
17 13. LAlP will be pleased to meet and confer with the representatives of the Stanislaus
18 County District Attorney's Office to discuss and resolve, informally, Mr. Peterson's requested
19 discovery and will seek a meeting in the coming days.
20 Ill
21 Ill
22 Ill
23 Ill
24 Ill
25 Ill
26 Ill
27 Ill
28 Ill
3
1 14. I have represented to the Court of Appeal that LAIP will proceed expeditiously
2 with our investigation in this case, and I am therefore respectfully requesting, on behalf of Mr.
3 Peterson, that the Court consider and grant the instant motion for post-conviction discovery
4 without delay, so LAIP' s investigation into Mr. Peterson's innocence claim can proceed in a
5 timely manner.
6 I declare and state, under penalty of perjury, under the laws of the State of California, that
7 the foregoing is true and accurate to the best of my recollection.
8 Executed on January 16, 2024, in Los Angeles, California.

9
10
11 Date
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4
EXHIBIT A
LOS ANGELES
INNOCENCE
PROJECT
November 14, 2023
The Honorable Jeff Laugero

District Attorney
Stanislaus County
832 12th Street, #300
Modesto, CA 95354-2327
Re: People v. Scott Peterson

Informal Request for Post-Conviction Discovery
California Court of Appeal, First Appellate District Case No. A 167615
Dear Mr. Laugero,
The Los Angeles Innocence Project represents Petitioner Scott Peterson in the
proceedings pending in Court of Appeal, referenced above. Pursuant to Penal Code section
1054.9, I am writing to request that your office provide us with informal discovery of the items
listed below.
We have obtained and reviewed trial files from Mr. Peterson's prior counsel in the case
and after a thorough search, we have not located the below items in those files.
The requests herein fall into the following categories:
I. Medina Burglary
2. Lt. Xavier Aponte Reports
3. Croton Watch
4. December 25, 2002, Van Fire in Airport District
5. Eyewitnesses Who Reported Seeing Laci Peterson On or After December 24
6. Eyewitnesses Who Reported Seeing the Petersons' Dog Alone and Unattended
7. Missing Bates Pages
8. Gene Ralston Reports, Videos, and Other Data Related to Bay Searches
9. All Reports, Videos, and Other Data Related to Bay Searches
I 0. Computer Forensics
11. Scent Dogs
12. MPD & SCD Policies Governing Disclosure of Conflicts of Interest
13. New Reports & Leads
14. Audio and Video Recordings of MPD Interviews with Scott Peterson.
We would appreciate an opportunity to meet and confer with your office about these
requests, if that would facilitate the process. We anticipate additional requests will be
forthcoming, once our review of the case materials is completed. For each item requested below,
we have endeavored to set forth the reasons for believing the requested discovery exists.
Los Angeles Innocence Project

Hertzberg-Davis Forensic Science Center - Cal State LA
1800 Pase-0 Rancho Castilla. Los Angeles CA, 90032
LOS ANGELES
INNOCENCE
PROJECT
1. MEDINA BURGLARY. A complete copy of the Modesto Police
Department's (MPD) investigation into the burglary of the Medinas' home at 516 Covena
Avenue (Medina Burglary), located directly across the street from the Petersons' home,
which occurred sometime between December 24, 2002 and December 26, 2002. (Modesto
Police Department Case No. 02-143025.) The items requested include but are not limited to
the following:
a. Audio and video recordings of the interviews MPD conducted with

Steven Todd and Donald Glenn Pearce at the Modesto Police Department the evening of
January 2, 2003, concerning their involvement in the Medina Burglary. We are also
requesting any available transcripts of those interviews.
Reason for believing items exist: The MPD interviews with Todd and Pearce conducted
on January 2, 2003, in "upstairs interview rooms" at the Modesto Police Department concerning
their role in the Medina Burglary are referenced in Officer Hicks's report at Bates 4120, and in a
handwritten Evidence Property Record at Bates 20405, as having been recorded on videotape,
with two videotapes having been entered into evidence. Mr. Peterson has not been provided with
those videotapes. Nor has he been provided with any audio recordings of those interviews, nor
any transcripts thereof.
b. All MPD investigation and other police reports memorializing the

steps MPD took to "verify" the alibis of Steven Todd and Donald Glenn Pearce,
establishing their whereabouts on December 24, 2002, including all interviews conducted
with "independent witnesses" who confirmed their alibis, including audio and video
recordings thereof, as well as written transcripts.
Reason for believing items exist: In 2018, Det. Brocchini was asked about the alibis of
Todd and Pearce on A&E's Grace v. Abrams and he stated: "I can tell you right now those
burglars for the 24th and the 25th, their alibis were verified. They were at home, like all good
dopers, eating dinner with Mom." Mr. Peterson has received no police reports, audio or video
recordings, or other materials indicating that MPD "verified" the alibis of Todd and Pearce and
determined that "[t]hey were at home, like all good dopers, eating dinner with Mom," as Det.
Brocchini stated. See Grace v Abrams that aired on A&E on May 8, 2018.
On May 2, 2021, CBS San Francisco reported that Det. John Buehler was interviewed by
CBS's 48 Hours about the alibis of Todd and Pearce and that Det. Buehler stated, "Both told
consistent stories that were backed up by other independent witnesses." Mr. Peterson has
received no police reports, or audio or video recordings, identifying any "independent witnesses"
who verified the alibis of Todd and Pearce, as Det. Buehler stated. See
https://www.cbsnews.com/sanfrancisco/news/retired-modesto-detective-still-convinced-scott-
peterson-killed-pregnant-wife-laci/.
In his March 30, 2023 interview with Fox, MPD Det. Brocchini was asked, "Is there a
chance that the burglary across the street from Scott and Laci' s house had anything to do with
2

1800 Pasco Rancho Castilla. Los Angeles CA, 90032
LOS ANGELES
IMMOCEMCE
PROJECT
her disappearance?" and he replied, "One hundred percent no. No way. We'd know. Those
guys, they polygraphed, they confessed, they went to jail. They gave us all their info, we
confirmed their alibis." Mr. Peterson has received no police reports, audio or video recordings,
or other materials indicating that MPD "verified" the alibis of Todd and Pearce. See 2023 Pet.,
Exh.O.
c. All police reports, audio and video recordings, and other relevant
materials indicating that MPD verified "the truthfulness" of the statements of Steven Todd
and Donald Glenn Pearce provided and cleared them of any involvement in the
disappearance of Laci Peterson.
Reason for believing items exist: On January 3, 2003, Det. George Stough stated at a
press briefing related to the search for Laci Peterson that Todd and Pearce had been apprehended
and cleared of any involvement and that MPD had verified "the truthfulness" of Steven Todd and
Donald Glenn Pearce's statements. Mr. Peterson has not been provided with any police reports
or other materials verifying "the truthfulness" of the statements Todd and Pearce provided to
MPD.
d. All reports, notes, computer generated data and results, Informed

Consent Forms and/or Polygraph Examination Waiver Forms and/or Polygraph
Examination Statement of Consent Forms and/or Miranda Waiver Forms and/or signed
confessions by Todd and Pearce, related to the investigation by MPD and/or California
DOJ Polygraph Examiner Jeannie Overall's polygraph examinations of Steven Todd and
Donald Glenn Pearce conducted on January 3, 2003.
Reason for believing items exist: See, e.g., report of Ms. Overall stating that she advised
Todd and Pearce of their constitutional rights prior to administering the examination. No signed
waivers of those rights have been produced to Mr. Peterson. Obtaining signed Informed Consent
Forms, Polygraph Examination Waiver Forms, Polygraph Examination Statement of Consent
Forms, Miranda Waiver Forms, and signed confession forms are essential components to any
voluntary polygraph examination and were standard police procedure in 2003. As such, they
would be expected to exist in a burglary investigation file, particularly one that law enforcement
determined to be possibly related to a homicide investigation file resulting in capital charges.
Mr. Peterson has not received any of that discovery.
In addition, in his March 30, 2023 interview with Fox, MPD Det. Brocchini was asked,
"Is there a chance that the burglary across the street from Scott and Laci's house had anything to
do with her disappearance?" and he replied, "One hundred percent no. No way. We'd know.
Those guys, they polygraphed, they confessed, they went to jail. They gave us all their info, we
confirmed their alibis." See 2023 Pet. Exh. 0. The data underlying the results and conclusions
drawn by the DOJ polygraph examiner from the polygraph examinations for Todd and Pearce are
therefore material and should be provided to Mr. Peterson. Mr. Peterson has not received any of
that discovery.
3

1800 Paseo Rancho Castilla, Los Ange les CA, 90032
LOS ANGELES
INNOCENCE
PROJECT
e. A complete copy of the handwritten notes and all other materials

generated by or located within the files of CA DOJ Polygraph Examiner Jeannie Overall
related to the polygraph examinations of Todd and Pearce on January 3, 2003, including
notes or reports explaining the basis for the examiner's decision not to ask either Todd or
Pearce whether they had any information about other individuals involved in the Medina
Burglary, or whether any oftheir associates participated with them in the Medina
Burglary, or whether they had any knowledge of anyone who was or may have been
involved in the abduction of Laci Peterson.
Reason for believing items exist: The polygraph materials related to Todd and Pearce
provided to Mr. Peterson are incomplete. It appears MPD and/or Ms. Overall conducted other
interviews with both men, which have not been produced, because there is no context informing
why Ms. Overall narrowly tailored the polygraph questions she posed to Todd and Pearce during
the polygraph examination to the following three questions: " 1. Did you personally cause the
disappearance of Laci Peterson? 2. Do you know for sure who caused Laci Peterson to
disappear? 3. Do you know where Laci Peterson is located now?" 1 Mr. Peterson has not
received any of that discovery.
f. Identification of the MPD vehicles in which Todd and Pearce were

interviewed on January 2, 2003, prior to being transported to the MPD, and whether those
vehicles were equipped with audio and/or video recording capability on that date. If the
vehicle was equipped with recording devices, please provide the audio and/or video
recordings of those interviews.
Reason for believing items exist: The lengthy, detailed written reports memorializing the
above-described interviews with Todd and Pearce appear to be taken from an audio or video
recording or transcript rather than from contemporaneous handwritten notes taken by the officer
on the scene.2 See Bates 4 11 0-4120; 20396-20397. Mr. Peterson has not received any of that
discovery.
g. Handwritten notes taken by MPD officers who interviewed Steven

Todd and Donald Glenn Pearce on January 2, 2003, while Todd and Pearce were seated in
1 A sworn declaration by a person with knowledge attesting to the fact that witnesses have reported to him that the
Medina home was broken into on December 24, 2002, and that associates of Todd and Pearce were also involved in
the Medina Burglary, will be filed in support of Mr. Peterson's Motion for Post-Conviction Discovery pursuant to
Penal Code section 1054.9, should that motion be necessary.
2 As is apparent from other witness interviews in this case, critical and exonerating information provided by
witnesses to law enforcement was not included in the subsequently written reports. (See RT 11191 - 11192
explaining that Det. Brocchini excised exculpatory information provided by Peggy O'Donnell from his written
report.) Accordingly, Mr. Peterson is requesting production of all audio and or video recordings of witness
statements, even where written reports of those statements have been provided.
4

1800 Paseo Rancho Castilla, Los Angeles CA, 90032
LOS ANGELES
INNOCENCE
PROJECT
in the back of a police patrol vehicle giving "explicit details," concerning their involvement
in the Medina Burglary the evening of January 2, 2003.
Reason for believing items exist: See Bates 4110-4120; 20396-20397. The lengthy
reports memorializing those interviews include very specific information that appears to have
been transposed either from an audio recording or transcript, or from contemporaneous notes
taken by an officer or officers on the scene. Mr. Peterson has not received any of that discovery.
h. All other interviews, recordings, and contacts made by MPD and/or

other law enforcement with Todd and Pearce during the 18 hours they were in custody,
between the commencement of the raid at the 1406/1407 Tenaya Drive properties
commencing around 5:30 p.m. on January 2, 2003, and the recorded polygraph
examinations that started at 11:30 a.m. on January 3, 2003, apart from the discovery
already requested above.
Reason for believing items exist: Given the high-profile nature of the massive ongoing
search for Laci Peterson on January 2-3, 2003, and the suspicion that the perpetrators of the
Medina Burglary may have been involved in her abduction, and Todd and Pearce's immediate
willingness to confess and cooperate, it is implausible they were not further interviewed by MPD
after their arrest. Mr. Peterson has not received any of that discovery.
i. All MPD and other law enforcement agency reports, notes,

statements, and/or other documents related to Steven Todd's release from custody and re-
arrest on January 6, 2003, including, but not limited to:
(1) All reports and/or documents related to Steven Todd's apparent posting of
bail for release after his arraignment on January 6, 2003;
(2) The report from the arresting officer;
(3) All reports and information regarding the basis for Todd's re-arrest;
(4) All notes, reports, and/or audio and video recordings of statements made
by Todd at the time of his rearrest, or while otherwise in MPD and/or
Stanislaus County Sheriff's Department custody;
(5) All investigative efforts into whether Todd utilized cash stolen from the
Medina property to post his bail bond on January 6, 2003.
Reason for believing items exist: See Bates 20406.
j. Booking photos for Steven Todd and Donald Glenn Pearce taken
upon their arrest on January 2, 2003, and all prior arrests. Photos documenting any
physical injuries on the persons of Todd and/or Pearce at the time of their arrest on
5

I 800 Paseo Rancho Castilla, Los Angeles CA, 90032
LOS ANGELES
INNOCENCE
PROJECT
January 2, 2003. Fingerprints (10 print cards) and palm prints for Todd and Pearce
collected by MPD on January 2, 2003.
Reason for believing items exist: The requested materials would have been collected by
MPD as a matter of routine, standard procedure at the time of an arrest. That information would
also be expected to exist in an investigation resulting in the filing of capital charges. Mr.
Peterson has not received any of that discovery.
k. All audio and/or video recordings and written witness interview

reports showing that MPD interviewed Susan and Rudy Medina about what they witnessed
on the morning of December 24, 2002, prior to leaving town, and whether they saw any
suspicious activity on their street, including whether either was shown photographs of
Steven Todd and/or Donald Glenn Pearce in attempt to identify whether they bad seen
either man on Covena Avenue that morning.
Reason for believing items exist: Asking the Medinas about whether they saw any
suspicious activity on their street the morning of December 24, the morning Laci disappeared,
including showing the Medinas photographs of the men who confessed to burglarizing their
home to see if one or both could recognized them as having been present on the street that
morning, would be a logical investigatory step to determine the veracity of Steven Todd's
statement to police that he was not present on Covena Avenue on December 24, 2002. Mr.
Peterson has not been provided with any such reports. 3
Mrs. Medina testified that on the morning of December 24, 2002, she had placed
outgoing mail in their mailbox that could be seen sticking out of it because the mailman had not
come by the time they left and that there was no mail sticking out of the mailbox upon their
return on December 26. Todd told police he could see mail in the Medinas' mailbox from the
street and assumed that was evidence the homeowners were out of town, at the time he
committed the burglary. The testimony at trial was that the mailman picked up the mail on
Covena shortly after the Medinas left town for the holidays. Mr. Peterson has received no
discovery reflecting the MPD's investigation into whether the Medinas were asked if they could
identify Todd as the person they saw on their street the morning of December 24, 2002.
I. All reports, interviews, audio and/or video recordings following up on

information provided by Lillian - who reported to MPD on January 1, 2003, that on
December 24, 2002, she had seen "a man on a bicycle" on Covena between the park and
Encina, about 10:15-10:20 a.m., whom she described as "5'8", white male, weathered face,
3
A sworn declaration by a person with knowledge attesting to the fact that the Medinas witnessed a suspicious-
looking man on their street, in front of their house on December 24, as they were driving away to go out of town and
who so concerned them that it caused them to circle the block to check on where he was going, will be filed in
support of Mr. Peterson's Motion for Post-Conviction Discovery pursuant to Penal Code section 1054.9, should that
motion be necessary.
L-Os Angeles Innocence Project

1800 Paseo Rancho Castilla. Los Angeles CA, 90032
LOS ANGELES
INNOCENCE
PROJECT
long blunt hair to ears, turned his head away, bicycle was loaded with saddle bags,
transient type person, relatively well groomed didn't respond to her saying hello,"
including whether Ms. '\111111 was shown photographs of either Steven Todd or Donald
Glenn Pearce to see whe~ she could identify either of them as the man she reported
seeing.
Reason for believing items e.x ist See Bates 14861. Showing Ms. viii photographs of
the men who confessed to committing the Medina Burglaiy to see if she co~ dentify either as
the man she saw riding his bike down the street on Covena A venue on December 24 would be a
logical investigato1y step to determine the veracity of Steven Todd's statement to police
indicating that he was not present on Covena A venue on December 24, 2002. Mr. Peterson has
not been provided with any such reports.
m. All reports, notes, interviews, recordings, and/or any other documents

related to the information provided to MPD by the - of Steven Todd's son, indicating
that the mother of Steven Todd's child had a history of selling babies in open adoptions
and any subsequent investigation based on the information provided.4
Reason for believing items exist: See Bates 15010 and 15031. Interviewing the-
of Steven Todd's son about her repo11 that Todd's associate had a histo1y of selling babies m
open adoptions appeai·s to be potentially highly material information police would investigate as
pru.1 of ru.1 investigation into the disappearance of pregnant Laci Peterson and one that resulted in
a capital murder charge against Mr. Peterson. Mr. Peterson has not been provided with any such
repo11s.
n. MPD's reports, notes and other records documenting the investigative

steps taken to determine the status of Steven Todd's methamphetamine use on December
24-26, 2002, which would have compromised his ability to recall dates and times of events
that week.
Reason for believing items exist: Todd admitted in his videotaped polygraph interview
that he was a daily user of drugs, so it would be a logical investigative step to consider whether
his drug use at the time may have interfered with his ability to recall the dates and times he
canied out the Medina Bw-gla1y. Todd later admitted in a post-conviction inte1view that he was
4 A sworn declaration by a person or persons with knowledge will be filed in support of Mr. Peterson's Motion for
Post-Conviction Discoveiy pursuant to Penal Code section 1054.9, should that motion be necessary, attesting to the
fact that this witness stated in a post-conviction interview conducted in 2010, that after providing the above-
described information to MPD, she had a subsequent incident with Steven Todd's 4-year-old son on the playground
in which he made a cutting motion across his chest and stomach and made a statement to her about Laci Peterson
and the "baby cut out." She further indicated that Steven Todd's sou talked about how his father had a "fondness for
knives." Fearing violent retaliation from the Todd family, whom this witness regarded as "dangerous," thelllll
asked in that post-conviction interview that her name not be included in any public filings.

LOS ANGELES
INNOCENCE
PROJECT
"so high on meth and crack" during the week of December 24-26, 2002, he didn't really
remember anything he did during that period.5
o. Cell phone records obtained by law enforcement for Donald Glenn

Pearce, Steven Todd, and/or any other suspect in the Medina Burglary investigation for the
period December 24-26, 2002.
Reason for believing items exist: MPD consistently and systematically collected cell
phone records of material witnesses, including Susan Medina, Karen Servas, and Scott Peterson,
as part of its investigation into the disappearance of Laci Peterson, so there is reason to believe
MPD would also have obtained those records for Todd and Pearce. Mr. Peterson has not
received that discovery.
p. A copy of Donald Glenn Pearce's receipt for the purchase of a Nokia

phone on December 24, 2002, as noted in the report of the January 2, 2003 search of 1406
and/or 1407 Tenaya Drive properties.
q. MPD police investigation reports, arrest reports, notes, recordings,

and/or other documents detailing Officer Mike Hicks's prior contacts with Donald Glenn
Pearce and Stephen Todd as indicated in Det. Stough's and Det. Hicks's reports.
Reason/or believing items exist: See Bates 20362; 4115.
r. All recordings, interview memoranda, audio and video recordings,

antl transcripts thereof, and/or other notes of communications between representatives of
the Stanislaus County District Attorney's Office, and other law enforcement, with suspects
Todd and Pearce, related to their role in the Medina Burglary, including but not limited to
plea negotiations, incentives offered, charges to be brought in the criminal complaints, plea
agreements entered into, the factual basis for the pleas entered into, abstracts of
judgments, and custody records for Steve Todd and Donald Glenn Pearce.
Reason for believing items exist: The requested discovery is generally included in
criminal case files where cases proceed to court proceedings and would be expected to be
included in the D.A. 's files.
s. All reports, notes, interviews, audio/video recordings and transcripts

thereof, photographs, and/or any other documents relating to the January 2, 2003 searches
MPD conducted pursuant to warrants issued in the Medina Burglary investigation,
s A sworn declaration by a person with knowledge attesting to these facts will be filed in support of Mr. Peterson's
Motion for Post-Conviction Discovery pursuant to Penal Code section 1054.9, should that motion be necessary.
8

LOS ANGELES
IMMOCEMCE
PROJECT
(1) The warrants issued and returns filed on the above-described properties,
including descriptions and photographs of all items of evidence found,
. including, but not limited to stolen items recovered and identified as not
belonging to the Medinas;
(2) Prope1iy destrnction and/or release forms for all items collected, identified
as the Medinas' property, and tu.med over to their possession;
(3) Photographs of all locations searched and all items recovered, including
the Medinas' safe, jewelry, tools, and money wrappers6;
(4) Inte1v iews or repo1ts documenting whether the Medinas were shown any
jewelry collected dwing the above-referenced searches that did not belong
to them;
(5) Inte1v iews or reports documenting whether Scott Peterson was shown any
jewelry collected during the above-referenced searches to see whether he
could identify it as having belonged to Laci;
(6) Audio/video recordings and trnnscripts thereof, notes, repo1ts, or any other
documents relating to all inte1views conducted, or statements obtained,
during the above-referenced searches;
(7) Notes, repo1ts, con-espondence, or other documents authored by all
officers present for and involved in the above-referenced searches,
including, but not limited to the following MPD personnel: Sgt. Cloward,
Officer Kelley, Officer Gonzales, Officer Intorf, Officer Pimentel, Det.
Grogan, Officer Meyer, Agt. Brodie, Sgt. Helton, Det. Hicks, Officer
Locke, Officer Fainter, Officer Ramirez, Lt. Watts, Agt. Suazo, Officer
Sanchez, and Officer Garcia.
Reason for believing items exist: One of the issues MPD was investigating in the search
for Laci Peterson was whether the Medina Burglary had any connection to her disappearance,
and whether any of the jewehy seized in the above-referenced searches could be identified as
having belonged to Laci Peterson that she may have been weaiing at the time of her
disappearance.
6
A sworn declaration by a person or persons with knowledge attesting to the fact that the police recovered the
Medinas' money wrappers will be filed in support of Mr. Peterson's Motion for Post-Conviction Discovery pursuant
to Penal Code section 1054.9, should that motion be necessary.
9

Hertzberg-Davis Forensic Science Center- Cal State LA
LOS ANGELES
INNOCENCE
PROJECT
A thorough search and documentation of the items seized, particularly jewelry, would be
expected to exist in any burglary investigation, and especially one law enforcement suspected of
being related to a murder resulting in capital murder charges. In addition, there is new evidence
that individuals in addition to Todd and Pearce were involved in burglarizing the Medinas' home
and that the burglary was carried out over a few days, so property seized from any of the above-
referenced locations may yield evidence of others involved in the Medina Burglary, who may
have encountered Laci Peterson on December 24. See 2023 Petition pending in the Court of
Appeal.
t. Reports, notes, photographs, audio/video recordings and transcripts

thereof, results of forensic testing, and/or other documents related to the gun and jewelry
anonymously dropped off at the Modesto Police Department on January 2, 2003, including
but not limited to:
(1) Digital copy of videotaped surveillance footage from the Modesto Police
Department lobby taken at approximately 1:10 a.m. on January 3, 2003,
depicting a white male adult, late 20s-30s, 5 '8" tall, approximately 150
pounds, coming into the lobby carrying a blue plastic shopping bag, and
telling the officer in the callbox he wanted to tum in some stolen
property, which was later determined to be jewelry and a gun from the
Medina Burglary.
(2) All reports, notes, photographs, audio and video recordings and
transcripts thereof, and other documents regarding any investigation into
the identity of the person or persons who anonymously dropped off items
stolen in the Medina Burglary to the MPD station.
(3) Officer Serratos' report documenting recovery of the gun inside the
shopping bags delivered to the MPD referenced above;
(4) Photographs of recovered property taken by CSO Hodson.
Reason for believing items exist: See Bates 413 1.
u. Police reports and/or notes documenting investigative steps taken in

the investigation of the Medina Burglary concerning eyewitnesses who reported to MPD
that they saw a van and three men located on the street outside the Medinas' home on
December 24, 2002, including but not limited to:
(1) Reports, interviews, audio and video recordings and transcripts thereof
(other than the hypnosis video which has already been provided to the
defense), written statements, or other documents related to the eyewitness
account provided by Diane Jackson indicating that she saw three

LOS ANGELES
IHHOCEHCE
PROJECT
suspicious men with a van outside the Medina home or in the La Loma
neighborhood on December 24, 2002, including but not limited to:
(a) Any attempted identifications by Ms. Jackson of the men

she reported seeing, and/or whether she saw Steven Todd,
Donald Glenn Pearce, and/or any other suspects potentially
involved in the Medina Burglary;
(b) Any attempted identification of the van Ms. Jackson saw
parked on Covena A venue on December 24, 2002, other
than the Martinez van, which she stated was not the van she
saw;
(c) Internal memoranda or correspondence regarding the
MPD's decision to hypnotize Diane Jackson;
(d) Reports regarding contacts with Ms. Jackson indicating that
MPD's decision to hypnotize her on January 17, 2003, was
a planned hypnosis interview and not a "cognitive"
interview that inadvertently resulted in hypnosis by an
interviewer, who was not qualified to conduct hypnosis, as
MPD later claimed in response to the defense's Trombetta
motion, July 8, 2003.7
Reason for believing items exist: See Bates 26023, 36747. Interviewing Ms. Jackson
about whether she could identify the van she saw, or Todd or Pearce, or anyone else, as the men
she saw standing near the van on Covena in front of the Petersons' and Medinas' homes the
morning of December 24, is potentially highly material information police would be expected to
investigate and follow up on as part of their investigation into the Medina Burglary and their
search to find Laci Peterson, and as part of an investigation that resulted in a capital murder
charge against Mr. Peterson. Mr. Peterson has not been provided with any such reports.
(2) All reports, interviews, audio and video recordings and transcripts thereof,
statements, or other documents related to the information provided by
Linda Chilies, wife of former MPD Det. Nick Chilies who worked with
Det. Brocchini, indicating that around 9:30 a.m. on December 24, 2002,
she saw three men, "S 1 was WMA, 30-40s, 5' 11 ", shoulder length dark
brown greasy hair, mustache, dark quilt type jacket. S2 was WMA 30-40
balding, medium build, flannel shirt. S3 she did not see well," and a van
7 A sworn declaration by a person or persons with knowledge attesting to the fact that the MPD informed Ms.
Jackson on January 17, 2003, that she would be hypnotized the following day, will be filed in support of Mr.
Peterson's Motion for Post-Conviction Discovery pursuant to Penal Code section 1054.9, should that motion be
necessary.
11

LOS ANGELES
INNOCENCE
PROJECT
parked outside the Medina residence, and that the men acted suspicious,
including but not limited to:
(a) All efforts MPD made to see if Ms. Chilies could identify
the men she reported seeing, and/or whether she saw
Steven Todd, Donald Glenn Pearce, and/or any other
suspects potentially involved in the Medina Burglary;
(b) All efforts MPD made to see if Ms. Chilles could identify
the van she saw parked on Covena A venue in front of the
Medinas' home the morning of December 24, 2002;
(c) All reports, notes, or other documentation regarding Linda

Chilles' s contact with Det. Doug Ridenour on December
31, 2002, in which she made a second attempt to report the
suspicious activity she saw.8
Reason/o r believing items exist: See Bates 14786. Interviewing and following up on the
report by Ms. Chilles, whose husband was a former MPD detective and who specifically reached
out to Det. Ridenour to report what she believed to be possible material information about the
disappearance of Laci Peterson, and whether she could identify Todd or Pearce, or anyone else,
as the men she saw standing near the van on Covena A venue the morning of December 24, is
potentially highly material information police would be expected to investigate and follow up on
as part of their investigation into the Medina Burglary and their search to find Laci Peterson, and
as part of an investigation that resulted in a capital murder charge against Mr. Peterson. Mr.
Peterson has not been provided with any such reports.
(3) All reports, interviews, audio and video recordings and written transcripts
thereof, statements, or other documents related to the tip provided by
Niniv . . . . indicating that he saw three Hispanic males 20s-30s,
standing~e near an older 1975-1980 van, white, full-sized, no
windows, possibly a Chevy van parked on the east side of Covena Avenue
in the afternoon on December 24, 2002, including but not limited to:
(a) All efforts MPD made to see ifMr.11111 could identify

the men he reported seeing, and/or whether he saw Steven
Todd, Donald Glenn Pearce, and/or any other suspect
8A sworn declaration by a person or persons with knowledge attesting to the fact that Ms. Chilies attempted at least
twice to report the information about the van and detailed descriptions of the men she had seen on Covena on
December 24, 2002, will be filed in support of Mr. Peterson's Motion for Post-Conviction Discovery pursuant to
Penal Code section 1054.9, should that motion be necessary.
12

LOS ANGELES
INNOCENCE
PROJECT
involved in the Medina Burglary on Covena A venue the
morning of December 24, 2002;
(b) All efforts MPD made to see if Mr. 1llllllcould identify

the van he saw parked on Covena Avenue in front of the
Medinas' home on December 24, 2002, which he described
in very specific detail. 9
Reason for believing items exist: See Bates 14791. Interviewing Mr. 1111111 about what
he saw and whether he could identify Todd or Pearce, or anyone else, as the men he saw standing
near the van on Covena A venue on December 24, is potentially highly material information
police would be expected to investigate and follow up on as part of their investigation into the
Medina Burglary and their search to find Laci Peterson, and as part of an investigation that
resulted in a capital murder charge against Mr. Peterson. Mr. Peterson has not been provided
with any such reports.
(4) All reports, interviews, recordings, statements, or other documents related

to the eyewitness account provided by Sean ~ ' indicating that
around 3:30 p.m. on December 24, 2002, he s a ~ e men wearing
stocking caps and sunglasses driving an older 70s van that drove past his
home in the La Loma neighborhood multiple times, and he saw the men
looking into windows of homes like they were looking for homes to
burglarize, including but not limited to any attempted identifications of the
van he observed.
Reason for believing items exist: See Bates 30868. Interviewing Mr. ~about
what he saw and whether he could identify the suspicious-looking van or men he described
seeing in the La Loma neighborhood on December 24, is potentially highly material information
police would be expected to investigate and follow up on as part of their investigation into the
Medina Burglary and search to find Laci Peterson, and as part of an investigation that resulted in
a capital murder charge against Mr. Peterson. Mr. Peterson has not been provided with any such
reports.
(5) All reports, interviews, audio and video recordings and transcripts thereof,
statemenJ~her documents related to the eyewitness account provided
by Kim " -• who told police on January 1, 2003, that she saw an
older "two-toned beige van," associated with three Hispanic men, who
frequently sold what appeared to her to be stolen goods from their van at
the corner of Yosemite Boulevard and Sante Fe Avenue, roughly two
9 A sworn declaration by a person or persons with knowledge attesting that Mr. 1111111 stated in a post-conviction
interview that he reported the information to the MPD while the search for Laci Peterson was ongoing, will be filed
in support of Mr. Peterson's Motion for Post-Conviction Discovery pursuant to Penal Code section 1054.9, shouJd
that motion be necessary.
13

LOS ANGELES
IMMOCEMCE
PROJECT
miles from the Petersons' home. Ms. ' i l l lfurther repo11ed that she had
been the victim of a burglary on December 21, 2002, and that she
suspected the van she described seeing might have been involved, and that
after the disappearance of Laci Peterson, the van she had seen at that
corner stopped showing up soon thereafter.
Reason for believing items exist: See Bates 14870. Interviewing Ms. vllllllll
about what
she saw and whether she could identify the Hispanic men she saw associated withthe van selling
stolen goods in late December 2002 is potentially highly material info1mation police would be
expected to investigate and follow up on as pa11 of their investigation into the Medina Burglary
and their search to find Laci Peterson, and as pat1 of an investigation that resulted in a capital
murder charge against Mr. Peterson. Mr. Peterson has not been provided with any such
repoits.10
v. Reports, notes, audio and video recordings and transcripts thereof,

photographs, chain of custody logs, and/or other documents relating to the processing of
the Medina residence, collection of forensic evidence therefrom, and any subsequent
examination of that evidence including but not limited to:
(1) The chain of custody and present status of the gloves the Medinas pointed
out to Evidence ID Technician Doug Lovell and described as having been
handled by the person or persons responsible for burglarizing their home;
(2) The chain of custody and present status of any swabs collected from the
gloves described in (1) above;
(3) Destrnction orders for (1) and (2), in the event those items have been
destroyed;
(4) Photographs of the Medina residence and of any evidence collected
therefrom;
(5) Fingerprint examination repo1ts by Evidence ID Technicians Doug Lovell
and Joy Smith and/or any other DNA or biological evidence collected
from the Medina residence, or their recovered prope1ty;
(6) Hairs, fibers, and/or other trace evidence, collected from the Medina
home;
10 A sworn declaration by a person or persons with knowledge attesting to the fact that Ms. . . . . . stated in a post-
conviction interview that she repo11ed the infonnation to the MPD while the search for Laci Peterson was ongoing,
and that she did not see the van she described at the corner of Yosemite and Santa Fe again after January 1, 2003,
will be filed in support of Mr. Peterson's Motion for Post-Conviction Discovery pursuant to Penal Code section
1054.9, should that motion be necessary.
14

Hertzberg-Davis Forensic Science Cenll'I - Cal State LA
LOS ANGELES
INNOCENCE
PROJECT
(7) Laboratory request forms or other correspondences requesting any
forensic testing on any evidence collected in relation to the Medina
Burglary;
(8) Lab reports and other reports, notes, and/or any documents associated with
forensic testing conducted on any evidence collected in relation to the
Medina Burglary;
(9) Destruction orders for all evidence collected in relation to the investigation
of the Medina Burglary.
Reason for believing items exist: See Bates 20385. Post-conviction interviews with
witnesses indicate that MPD Evidence ID Technician Doug Lovell took photographs inside, and
collected and processed evidence in the Medinas' home on December 26, 2002. Photographs
taken on or soon after that date and Lovell 's report reflect the presence of fingerprint dust on one
of the Medinas' doors, a chair, several boxes, and containers, envelopes found inside the
Medinas' home, and possibly elsewhere. Mr. Peterson has not been provided with any
photographs taken inside the Medinas' home on December 26, nor has he been provided with
any fingerprint examination reports, nor any other lab reports related to evidence collected from
inside the Medinas' home. 11
w. All reports, notes, interviews, audio and video recordings and
transcripts thereof, and/or other documents containing information regarding the identity
of all confidential informants utilized by law enforcement in the investigation of the
Medina Burglary, who may have information regarding additional individuals associated
with the Medina Burglary, including but not limited to:
(I) Informant referenced in Off. Helton's report at Bates 2391;
(2) Informant referenced in Off. Helton's report at Bates 2392;
(3) Informant referenced in Det. Stough's report at Bates 20361;
(4) Informant referenced in Det. Stough's report at Bates 20365;
(5) Informant referenced in Agt. Brodie's report at Bates 20397;
(6) Informant referenced in Det. Cloward's report at Bates 20393.
Reason for believing items exist: See Bates noted above. In addition, identifying
information of the informant(s), including all statements made by the informant(s) to all law
enforcement officers, including parole agents assisting in the investigation, any offers of leniency
or other benefits made to the informant(s), and any investigatory actions taken as a result of the
information given by the informant(s) would be expected to be maintained in the course of a
11 A sworn declaration by a person or persons with knowledge attesting to the fact that MPD collected evidence
from inside the Medinas' home on December 26, 2002, and thereafter will be filed in support of Mr. Peterson's
15

LOS ANGELES
INNOCENCE
PROJECT
burglary investigation and preserved in the file and disclosed to the defense in a capital murder
case.
x. Reports, notes, audio and video recordings and transcripts thereof,
and/or other documents produced by MPD Off. Shawn Kelley and/or Off. John Sanchez
related to the drive taken with the confidential informant, in which the CI identified
residences 1406 and 1407 Tenaya Avenue and Stephen Todd and Donald Glenn Pearce as
having involvement in the Medina Burglary.
Reason for believing items exist: See Sgt. Helton's repo11 at Bates 2391.
y. All reports, notes, audio and video recordings and transcripts thereof,
and/or other documents related to the anonymous person who provided Oscar Souza and
Mike Brodie with the Tech 9 and 30-round magazine which had been stolen during the
Medina Burglary, including but not limited to information identifying the anonymous
person.

z. MPD Reports and other information confirming that Ralph 12
is the MPD confidential informant who notified the police on January 2, 2003, that Steven
<a
Todd, Donald Glenn Pearce, and possibly one additional suspect named "Mark," were
responsible for the Medina Burglary, including but not limited to:
(1) Ralph - •s status as an :MPD informant;
(2) Infonnation related to whether Ralph dlllllll received a reward for the
info1mation he provided to :MPD regar~ uspects in the Medina
Burglary;
(3) Ralph - •s criminal histo1y;
(4) Ralph Gl- S arrest report of Janll8f}' 3, 2002, and related booking
photos, c~ ial statements ~ made to MPD, and audio and video
recordings and transcripts ther~ onceming ctllll•s knowledge of the
individuals involved in the Medina Burglary an~ aci Peterson's
disappearance.
(5) Ralph - •s charging documents related to his anest on Janua1y 3,
2003, for the receipt of stolen property, plea negotiations with :MPD and
12 While Ralph clllllis not named in any of the :MPD reports, he has been identified by others as the infonmmt
referred to as "Mr. X," who provided police with infom:i.ation on January 2, 2003, about who was responsible for the
blll'glary of the Medinas' home. Bates 20361. A sworn declaration by a person or persons with knowledge attesting
to the fact of Ralph <Ill's knowledge of material events and his admission that he called in the report to :MPD
about Todd and Pearce's rnvolvement will be filed in support of Mr. Peterson's Motion for Post-Conviction
Discovery pursuant to Penal Code section 1054.9, should that motion be necessary.
16

LOS ANGELES
INNOCENCE
PROJECT
the Stanislaus County D.A. 's office, the factual basis for the plea Mr.
<Ill entered, and abstract ofjudgment related to his guilty plea.
Reason for believing items exist: See, e.g., Bates 2392 n.13; Stanislaus County Superior
Court records for Case No. 1052317.
aa. MPD Reports, notes, audio and video recordings and transcripts
thereof, and/or other documents related to the information Det. Stough received about the
possible involvement of a "Mark" and other suspects, as indicated in Sgt. B elton's reports,
(1) Repo11s or other documentation relating to all MPD officers' prior contact
with or knowledge of Mark 1111111
which led them to suspec~ that
a "Mark" was involved in the~ ary was refe1ring to Mark 1- ;
(2) Repo11s, notes, photographs, recordings, search wail'ant(s), if any, and
other documents relating to the ''raid" of Mark ~ . including any
search wan-ant obtained and executed, and the retlun associated therewith;
(3) Reports, notes, and/or other documents regarding the individual listed as
"first name Gregg" interview by Agent Brodie at
including his foll name and identifying infonnation;
(4) Repo11s, notes, interviews, recordings, and/or other documents related to
suspect Vironi.
Reaso11for believing items exist: See Bates 2389, 2392, 20397.
bb. A complete copy of the MPD and Stanislaus County District
Attorney's Office case files related to the December 24, 2002 burglary of the Medina home
at 516 Covena Avenue (MPD Case #02-142591), including all audio and videotaped
recordings and transcripts of those recordings, reports, notes, inteni.ews, evidence logs,
correspondence and/or other investigatory documents not yet requested above and not yet
provided to Mr. Peterson, including but not limited to:
(1) Diane Jackson

(2) Linda Chilles
(3) Niniv
(4) Sean
(5) Lillian
(6) Kim
(7) Robel1 Nickerson
(8) Susan Medina
(9) Rudy Medina
(10) Steven Todd
(I 1) Donald Glenn Pearce
17

LOS ANGELES
INNOCENCE
PROJECT
(12)
(13)
(14)
(15) Lisa
(16) Nico
(17) Etw·
(18) Delo
(19) Paul
(20) Elda
(21) Gre
(22) Mar
(23) Mar
(24) Kell
(25) Ralp
(26) Bud
(27) Cliff Koen
(28) "Sanjeet"
(29) Telesia Koen
(30) Melissa McDaniels
Reason for believing items exist: The individuals above are referenced in various police
reports as potentially having information related to the burglRly of the Medinas' home.
2. LT.XAVIER APONTE REPORTS. A complete copy of the MPD

investigation into the exculpatory information CDCR Lt. Xavier Aponte provided to MPD
regarding Laci Peterson witnessing Steven Todd committing the Medina Burglary on
December 24, 2002 (MPD Case No. 02-143025).
The defense believes the items requested below exist based on thefollowiug i11fon11ation
takenfrom 2023 Pet. Exhs. T, U, Va11d Z.
Among the 43,000 pages of discovery given to Mr. Peterson's defense team, a single
entry in an MPD «tip" sheet documented a call from Lt. Aponte on Janua1y 22, 2003. The enhy
on the "tip" sheet states: "909-273-2901 CRC NORCO - Received info from Shawn Tenbrink
(inmate) he spoke to brother Adam who said Steve Todd said Laci witnessed him breaking in.
Could not give dates or time. Aponte bas further info" (emphasis added).
13 In his January 2, 2003 interview with Officer Hicks, Steven Todd refers to a "Greg ~ " as someone with
whom he distributed the stolen Medina prope11y. Post-conviction investigation has revealed that this person is
"Gregg ~ "
18

LOS ANGELES
IMMOCEMCE
PROJECT
To date, that is the only infonnation the MPD has ever provided to Mr. Peterson's
attorneys (trial, appellate, or habeas) regarding MPD's investigation into the exculpatory, and if
true, exonerating. infonnation Lt. Aponte provided to MPD concerning the timing ofLaci's
disappearance, and a report that she witnessed a burglary in progress across the street from her
home, after Mr. Peterson left home for the day.
The MPD failed to disclose to the defense at the time of trial any reports or
documentation of its investigation into the information Lt. Aponte provided. The defense did not
appreciate the materiality of Mr. Tenbrink's information until the trial was almost over, when
they learned that Shawn and Adam Tenbrink lived in the Airport District in Modesto and were
associates of Steven Todd. •
The defense contacted Lt. Aponte and he signed a statement for the defense on December
1, 2004, documenting the steps MPD took to investigate. This statement was signed during the
penalty phase of Mr. Peterson's trial-after the jury had already reached a guilty verdict without
the benefit of hearing the information Lt. Aponte provided to MPD.
The defense then submitted Lt. Aponte's signed statement to the court documenting the
steps MPD took to investigate Mr. Aponte's information, which the prosecution had failed to
disclose to the defense. The defense requested that the prosecution provide "all material related
to the NORCO investigation" and moved for a mistrial. The prosecution then obtained its own
signed statement from Lt. Aponte dated March 9, 2005.
Lt. Aponte's signed statements say he made two phone calls about a week apart to MPD
to report information about Laci Peterson witnessing the Medina Burglary on December 24. Lt.
Aponte made the second phone call to MPD because he received no response to the first call. It
is not clear whether the tip sheet provided to Mr. Peterson is the first or second call made by Lt.
Aponte.
Lt. Aponte's signed statements say he made a tape of the call between inmate Shawn
Tenbrink and his brother Adam. To date, the defense has never received any audio or transcripts
of this recorded conversation.
Lt. Aponte further reported in his signed statements that an MPD detective called him to
follow up on the information he provided in his calls and several steps were undertaken by MPD
to investigate his report, including an unnamed MPD detective interviewing Mr. Tenbrink
telephonically. However, to date, the defense has received no information explaining or
reporting or documenting MPD's follow up, including no recording of the above-described MPD
phone interview with Mr. Tenbrink.
Lt. Aponte reported that after the unnamed MPD detective telephonically interviewed
inmate Shawn Tenbrink, he asked Lt. Aponte to more closely monitor Shawn Tenbrink. Lt.
Aponte said that after Mr. Tenbrink was finished being interviewed by the MPD detective, he
19
Los Angeles Innocence Proj ect

1800 Pasco Rancho Castilla, Los Angeles CA, 90032
LOS ANGELES
IMMOCEHCE
PROJECT
went back to his cell and called his mother. As directed, Lt. Aponte listened to Shawn
Tenbrink's call with his mother and heard him tell her to tell his brother, Adam, "the police had
just interviewed him, and he was to keep his mouth shut because he doesn't know he's dealing
with." Again, MPD has provided no report, or recording, or any other information to the defense
concerning, or documenting the contents of the phone call between Shawn Tenbrink and his
mother, and the defense has been provided with no information regarding what steps, if any, Lt.
Aponte took to provide the information he gathered to the MPD, as directed by the detective.
Given the detective's direct request, which immediately preceded Shawn Tenbrink's call
to his mother, the warning to his brother, and the fact that there was a massive search underway
for Laci Peterson that was highly publicized, it is highly unlikely that Lt. Aponte did nothing
with the information he received. However, the defense has never been provided with any
information explaining or reporting or documenting this call between Mr. Tenbrink and his
mother--other than what the defense was able to obtain from Lt. Aponte, almost two years later.
In response to the defense request for "all material related to the NORCO investigation,"
the prosecution provided the defense with no additional discovery. Instead, the prosecution
provided the court with an unresponsive, carefully worded affidavit by MPD Det. Grogan,
explaining the steps he took to "search" MPD's files for the information defense was requesting.
On its face, Det. Grogan's affidavit appeared to be thorough, but upon closer scrutiny it is
clear a more exhaustive search is needed, as set forth below. The discovery the defense
requested 20 years ago was not then and has never since been provided to Mr. Peterson.
Based on the foregoing, please provide:
a. Audio recordings and transcripts of all calls Lt. Aponte made to

MPD, or any other law enforcement agency involved in the search for Laci Peterson,
including but not limited to the two calls Lt. Aponte described making in January-
February 2003.
b. All MPD and other law enforcement agency reports, handwritten and
typed notes, call logs, audio and/or video recordings, voicemail recordings, investigative
materials, and/or any other documents regarding the calls Lt. Aponte made to MPD,
including but not limited to the two calls Lt. Aponte described making in January-
February 2003.
c. All recordings and transcripts of calls recorded by NORCO between

inmate Shawn Tenbrink and his brother Adam, including but not limited to the call Lt.
Aponte described in bis report to MPD.
20

LOS ANGELES
INNOCENCE
PROJECT
d. All investigative actions MPD took in response to receiving the
information Lt. Aponte reported in his two calls to MPD, and any reports and/or
documents related thereto, including but not limited to:
(1) The identity of the unnamed MPD detective who interviewed Shawn
Tenbrink in late January or early February 2003 about Laci Peterson
having seen Steven Todd while the Medina Burglary was in progress and
who thereafter directed Lt. Aponte to monitor Mr. Tenbrink's telephone
calls;
(2) Phone records, police reports, audio recordings, and any other record
documenting every phone call ever made by and between Det. Grogan and
Lt. Aponte between January 2003 and today;
(3) Reports, notes, and/or audio/video recordings and transcripts thereof

documenting the contents of a call, or calls, made by an unnamed
detective of the MPD, or any other law enforcement representative, to Lt.
Aponte or NORCO, in late January or early February 2003, per Lt.
Aponte's signed statements;
(4) Reports, notes, and/or audio and video recordings and transcripts thereof
of interviews by MPD and its representatives, or any other law
enforcement representative or agent with Shawn Tenbrink when he was
incarcerated at the California Rehabilitation Center (CRC) in Norco,
California, regarding any issue, including statements related to an
individual with knowledge of or confessing to committing the crimes for
which Mr. Peterson was conviction14;
(5) Reports and/or notes regarding the phone call placed by Shawn Tenbrink
to his mother indicating that he was interviewed by police while
incarcerated at CRC in Norco, as indicated by Lt. Aponte's December 1,
2004 statement, and any other calls related to the Medina Burglary or Laci
Peterson;
(6) Reports and/or notes regarding the monitoring and/or surveillance of
Shawn Tenbrink's calls, mail, visits and/or other activities while he was in
custody at NORCO, as indicated by Lt. Aponte in his signed statement of
December 1, 2004.
14A sworn declaration by a person with knowledge attesting to the fact that Lt. Aponte has since stated he believes
he may have videotaped the interview between Shawn Tenbrink and the unnamed MPD detective(s) while Mr.
Tenbrink was in Lt. Aponte's office will be filed in support of Mr. Peterson's Motion for Post-Conviction Discovery
pursuant to Penal Code section 1054.9, should that motion be necessary.
21

LOS ANGELES
IMMOCEHCE
PROJECT
e. All materials related to Det. Craig Grogan's search for materials
related to the Aponte reports, as detailed in Det. Grogan's March 9, 2005 affidavit,
(1) A complete and thorough description of all locations within the MPD's
systems for cataloguing and storing reports, communications, evidence,
and other materials in serious felony cases, including descriptions of how
the above-described items are systematically managed and preserved for
retrieval, in compliance with law enforcement's discovery responsibilities
and Brady obligations;
(2) A complete and thorough description of all "computerized files" Det.
Grogan searched for "the tip listing Shawn Tenbrink referred to by the
defense," and the search terms he used, as referenced in his March 9, 2005
affidavit;
(3) A complete copy of all information and documents collected as a result of
a broad and complete search of all MPD systems, including but not limited
to "computerized files," for all terms possibly related to the materials the
defense is requesting and to which the defense is entitled. For example,
searching for the terms such as: Aponte, NORCO, Tenbrink, Adam,
Shawn, Todd, among many others, would be far more likely to return
responsive results than searching for precise language not designed to
return responsive information, as Det. Grogan apparently did;
(3) A complete and thorough description of all "handwritten reports" that
were searched by Det. Grogan for "reports mentioning Aponte or
Tenbrink," as referenced in his March 9, 2005 affidavit;
(4) All the actual communications, correspondence, emails, voicemails,
recorded messages, and any other forms of requests Det. Grogan sent to
Modesto Police Department "detectives, officers, and supervisors involved
in the Peterson investigation" requesting "information about an interview
between an officer or detective and Shawn Tenbrink," as referenced in
Det. Grogan's March 9, 2005 affidavit;
(5) All the actual communications, correspondence, emails, voicemails,
recorded messages, and any other forms of responses Modesto Police
Department personnel or any other law enforcement entity sent to Det.
Grogan in response to his request for "information about an interview
between an officer or detective and Shawn Tenbrink," as referenced in
Det. Grogan's March 9, 2005 affidavit;
22

LOS ANGELES
INNOCENCE
PROJECT
(6) All of the actual correspondence between Det. Grogan and "supervisors in
the Investigative Services Unit" regarding whether the Modesto Police
Department conducted any interviews at the Norco facil ity related to the
Laci Peterson case, as referenced in Det. Grogan's March 9, 2005
affidavit.
f. All communications and correspondence between the Modesto Police
Department and Lt. Aponte of California Rehabilitation Center in Norco, including but not
limited to:
(1) The actual fax, including any cover sheet and other information Det.
Grogan communicated to Lt. Aponte when he faxed him a copy of the "tip
sheet" in 2005, as referenced in Det. Grogan's March 9, 2005 affidavit;
(2) Lt. Aponte's actual response(s) to Det. Grogan's 2005 fax, referenced in
(1), whether by email, voicernail, fax, or any other means, as indicated in
Lt. Aponte's March 3, 2005 declaration;
(3) A digital copy and written transcript of the voicemail message(s) left by
Lt. Aponte with the Modesto Police Department tipline for the
investigation of the Laci Peterson case as referenced in Lt. Aponte's
March 3, 2005 declaration.
g. All communications and correspondence between the Modesto Police
Department and the California Rehabilitation Center (CRC) in Norco regarding any of the
following:
(1) The information Lt. Aponte provided to MPD regarding Steven Todd
seeing Laci Peterson on the morning of December 24, 2002;
(2) All recorded conversations between Shawn and Adam Tenbrink, and
recorded conversations between Shawn Tenbrink and his mother;
(3) All interviews-telephonic, in-person, or otherwise--conducted with

Shawn Tenbrink, and audio and video recordings and transcripts thereof;
(4) Any other matter related to the Laci Peterson case or the Medina Burglary.
3. CROTON WATCH. A complete copy of the MPD and Stanislaus County

District Attorney Office's inves~~ into the Croton watch that was pawned on
December 31, 2002~nna ~ ' and a watch that was pawned on February 14,
2003, by Anthony ~ -
The defense believes the items requested below exist based on the following information
taken from trial transcripts and MPD police reports Bates 40, 357-358, 620-626, 628, 42678-
42686, 43055, 43083, 42985-42995.
23

LOS ANGELES
INNOCENCE
PROJECT
When Laci Peterson was reported missing on December 24, 2002, Mr. Peterson told
MPD officers that when he left that morning, Laci was wearing a wristwatch she inherited from
her grandmother that had diamonds around the face.
On February 6, 2003, Det. Grogan found an eBay listing by Scott and Laci for an
"Amazing Diamond Bezel Ladies Watch Croton." He determined that this watch matched the
description of the watch Mr. Peterson said Laci was wearing the day she went missing. Det.
Grogan was able to determine that the watch was not sold on eBay.
Det. Grogan testified that he did "a lot of investigation of the jewelry" to "establish what
jewelry Laci Peterson had, what she received, what was potentially missing to see if [police] had
in fact recovered all of the jewelry or most of the jewelry that had been described by the
defendant that she was wearing." Det. Grogan testified that it was a long process over several
months.
On March 6, 2003, Laci's Croton watch was still unaccounted for, so Det. Grogan had an
MPD officer search pawn records for the word "Croton." The officer found one pawn record: a
woman had pawned a Croton watch on December 31, 2002-one week after Laci went
missing-at a pawn shop less than three miles from Scott and Laci's home. However, no follow-
up investigation reports on this pawn were provided to Mr. Peterson. To date, Laci's Croton
watch is still unaccounted for.
Mr. Peterson's trial attorney entered this pawn slip into evidence at trial on June 17,
2004. As a result, Lt. Mark Smith with the Stanislaus Cou~istrict Attorney's Office
~~ed for the woman who pawned the watch, Deanna RIIIIIIII, and her boyfriend, James
1111111, to be interviewed in July 2004 in Oklahoma, where they were then living, by Oklahoma
law enforcement investigator Marc Saunders.
The report from Inv. Saunders refers to email correspondence between Lt. Smith and Inv.
Saunders which "describes the person whom he desires to be interviewed, the information
desired, and the attachment of associated documents in the form of a pawn receipt and the
~~raph of a watch." Inv. Saunders interviewed Deanna - and her boyfriend James
~ on July 6, 2003, and again on July 7, 2003. Inv. Saunders recorded all four interviews.
Ms. - told Inv. Saunders that she redeemed the original pawn and then pawned the
watch a second time on Valentine's Day of 2003, under the name Anthony~ who was
with her that day. Ms. - told Inv. Saunders that she never redeemed the second pawn
"because of a visit to her home by detectives in late February or early March 2003." She
reported that the detectives who visited her were looking for a watch that may have belonged to
Laci Peterson. During this visit, Ms. - gave the detectives the second pawn slip from the
February 14, 2003 pawn.
24

LOS ANGELES
INNOCENCE
PROJECT
Both itlllland itlllll
told Inv. Saunders that they were visited by "detectives with star
shaped badges" and an investigator for Scott Peterson. Mr. Peterson's defense has never been
provided with any investigation reports documenting a 2003 visit by MPD, or the
Stanislaus County District Attorney's Office, or anyone else in law enforcement carrying
star shaped badges. 15
- explained that the first visit from investigators asking questions abo~~awned
Croton watch occurred "a week or so to 10 days" before March 12, 2003, the date Rllllll 's
home, located at- Rimrock in Modesto, was raided by police. See People v. Shivar,
California Court of Appeal Fifth Appellate District Case No. F04581 l , unpublished opinion from
May 30, 2006.16
On March 6, 2003, roughly one week before the MPD raided - 's home at-
Rimrock, Det. Grogan issued a report stating that an MPD CSO had searched records for the
word "Croton" and found a single Croton watch pawn ticket, which had Deanna - •s name
on it.
Additionally, pawn shop owner Sam 1'111111

stated in a televised interview that aired in
2017 that the Modesto Police were "looking for a Croton watch, and evidently [he] popped up in
the system, the only one in the last six months or so that had purchased a Croton watch." See
September 2017 A&E Series Extra Content Transcripts (emphasis added). In that interview,
Newnam describes what is in Det. Grogan's police report about the March 6, 2003 search for the
word "Croton" and the fact that the MPD CSO found "one." Newnam goes onto say that he put
the watch on hold for the police.
MPD continued its investigation into the pawned watch in October 2004 , when James
Romano came forward with additional information.
Based on the foregoing, please provide:
a. All notes, reports, correspondence, and communications including

written correspondence, emails, voicemail recordings, faxes, photos, audio and video
recordings, and written transcripts thereof, related to Lt. Mark Smith's discussions with
Inv. Marc Sauders regarding the MPD's (and/or any other law enforcement agency's) 2004
15 Mr. Peterson did not learn about or have any knowledge that a Croton watch was pawned at a nearby pawn shop
within days of his wife's disappearance· · til a er his arrest on April 25, 2003, when his attorneys began receiving
discovery. The pawn slip with Deanna 's name on it (Bates 628) was not provided to the defense until after
April 25, 2003. To the extent FIi believ the investigator who visited her in February or early March of2003
may have been hired by the Peterson fami ly, she was mistaken.
16 FIi also recalled that the first visit occurred b ~ister and brother-in-law, S h a n e ~' were
involved in a high-speed car chase that resulted in 1111111111
's death, whfoh was on March 11, 2003.
25

1800 Pasco Rancho Castill a, Los Angeles CA, 90032
LOS ANGELES
INNOCENCE
PROJECT
investigation into the Croton watch Deana - pawned on December 31, 2002, and
February 14, 2003.
b. All notes, reports, correspondence, photos, audio and video

recordings, and written transcripts thereof, pho-o ra hs, and/or other documents related
to law enforcement's interview(s) with Deanna and James - regarding the
Laci Peterson investigation, including but not lim1te to:
(1) All reports and statements made by James Itlllllll and Deanna - to
law enforcement regarding the Croton watc~ 2003 !._~resent
date, including but not limited to statements Itlllllll and 1111111 made
desc1ibing the watch that was pawned before theywere shown a photo of
Laci>s Croton watch, and the inte1view Inv. Mark Sanders conducted with
and - when he showed - a photograph of a watch and
a photograph of a watch. See Bates 42683, 42680.
(2) All photographs of watches Inv. Sanders showed to - and -

including but not limited to the Croton watch.
c. All notes, reports, correspondence, photos, audio and video

recordings, and written transcripts thereof, related to the February and/or early March
2003 interview MPD or any other law enforcement agency conducted with Deanna -
at - Rimrock.
d. All notes, reports, correspondence, photos, audio and video

recordings, and written transc~ thereof, related to the sui-veillance MPD and/or other
law enforcement performed at - Rimrock in 2003, including but not limited to
surveillance conducted by Officer Hicks.
e. Identify the "confidential reliable informant (CRI), known as 'X,"'

Officer Hicks used to enter the residence at - Rimrock Court and purchase
metbampbetamine from Deanna - ·
f. All notes, reports, correspondence, photos, audio and video

recordings, and written transcripts th~ei-eof.and/or other documents related to law
enforcement's interactions ,vith Sam , and/or The Pawn Shop, between 2003 and
the present date, regarding the Croton watc eanna ~ ed on December 31,
2002, and February 14, 2003, under the name of Antho~ .
g. All notes, reports, correspondence, photos, audio and video

recordings, and written transcripts thereof, and/or other documents related to the
information James Romano provided to the Modesto Police Department in 2004 regarding
the abduction of Laci Peterson (Bates 42986-42990), including, but not limited to:
26

LOS ANGELES
INNOCENCE
PROJECT
(1) All statements made by James Romano to law enforcement officers and/or
con-ectional facility staff regarding information he had relating to the Laci
Peterson investigation, including, but not limited to, his statements made
to:
(A) Modesto Police Clerk Lisa McOwen, as indicated in Bates
42986;
(B) Stanislaus County SheriffDep. Teny Johnson, as indicated
in Bates 42986;
(C) Modesto Police Depai1ment Det. Dodge Hendee, as
indicated in Bates 42986;
(D) " Sgt. Campbell of the Stanislaus Co. S.O." as indicated in
Bates 42987;
(E) "Deputy Safford" as indicated in Bates 42987;
(F) "Deputy Johnson" as indicated in Bates 42987.
(2) All repo11s, memoranda, or other documents authored by individuals

identified in number 3(g)(l)(A)-(F) relating to the info1mation James
Romano provided to law enforcement;
(3) All notes, repo1ts, statements, or other investigato1y documents relating to
subjects named by James Romano in the repo1t(s) he provided to law
enforcement, including, but not limited to:
(A) James Romano·
(B) James/Ji.mm ;
(C) Michelene ;
(D) Anth ;
(E)
(F) Tim
(G) Ray ;
(H) Deanna - ;
(I) Jimmie ctlllll ·
(4) All audio and/or video recordings of interviews with James Romano,
James/Jimmy . , and Michelene FIii, as indicated on Bates 42996,
and/or any other witness named in the ~ mation James Romano
provided to law enforcement as identified in number 3(g)(3)(A)--{I);
(5) All internal conespondence by and between law enforcement officers

and/or co1Tectional facility staff regarding the information James Romano
provided, including, but not limited to:
27

LOS ANGELES
INNOCENCE
PROJECT
(A) Sgt. Mike Zahr's request to Lisa McOwen to have Det.
Hendee interview James Romano as indicated in Bates
42986;
(B) Lisa McOwen's request to Det. Hendee to interview James
Romano as indicated in Bates 42986;
(C) Sgt. Campbell's request to Deputy Safford to interview
James Romano, as indicated in Bates 42987;
(D) Det. Dodge Hendee's conversation with Det. George
Stough regarding his investigation into the Medina
Burglary, as indicated in Bates 42989-42990.
(6) All reports, copies of correspondence, and other records documenting

the surveillance of James Romano's outgoing mail while incarcerated at
Stanislaus County Public Safety Center between 2003-2004, including
any letters in which James Romano indicated to "Friends Outside" that
he had information relating to the Laci Peterson investigation, as
indicated in Bates 42987;
(7) Bookin_~ os of Anthony ~ . Curtis . , Deanna Harbin, and

James 11111111 and the "COL p~aph" of Mtchilene - shown to
James Romano on October 19, 2004, as indicated in Det. Hendee's
report at Bates 42988-42989;
(8) All reports, communications, correspondence, photos, notes, audio and

video recordings and transcripts thereof, and/or other documents relating
to all contacts between MPD personnel and James itlllll
in relation to
the Laci Peterson investigation, including but not limited to the incident
in which he provided law enforcement with a pawn ticket for a watch
made out to Anthony ~ ' as indicated in Bates 42989;
(9) All reports, notes, correspondence, or other documents regarding any

contacts of MPD or other law enforcement related to the investigation
into "The Pawn Shop," located a t - Oakdale Road, where James
Romano indicated Deanna Harbinhadpawned a watch, in or around
February 2003, as indicated in Bates 42987;
All reports, records, notes, correspondence, or other documents
describing all efforts made by law enforcement to identify a man who
was in possession of items jewelry from the Medina Burglary and goes
by the street name "Fireman," as indicated in Bates 42988;
(11) All statements by James Romano in his October 18, 2004 interview
identifying someone named "Coyle" as having been involved in the
28

LOS ANGELES
INNOCENCE
PROJECT
Medina Burglary, as indicated in his October 19, 2004 interview at
Bates 42989;
(12) All records, reports, or other documents related to and/or describing or
summarizing James Romano's criminal case history, including
sentencing proceedings at the time he came forward with information
regarding the disappearance of Laci Peterson in 2004, as represented to
the Court by DDA David Harris at RT 19699.
4. DECEMBER 25, 2002, VAN FIRE IN AIRPORT DISTRICT. A complete

copy of Modesto Police Department Case No. 02-142687 and Modesto Fire Department
(MFD) Case No. SMF02019142, concerning the investigation of an incendiary fire of an
orange van containing a mattress with apparent bloodstains, located in the alley between
612 Thrasher and 607 Empire,17 less than one mile from the Petersons' home, in the early
morning of December 25, 2002, the day after Laci Peterson was reported missing. The
items requested include but are not limited to the following:
a. Digital copies of all 911 calls reporting the incendiary vehicle fire the
morning of December 25, 2002.
Reason for believing items exist: MFD responded to one or more 911 calls.
b. A complete color copy of the DOJ Central Valley Crime Laboratory

file, including but not limited to all bench notes, diagrams, DNA reports including
electronic data, gas chromatograms, photos, lab request forms, all documents regarding
the examination and forensic testing of all items of evidence collected from the van,
including but not limited to the mattress cutting, the rag collected from the fuel tank, any
fingerprints and/or palm prints lifted from the scene.
Reason for believing items exist: Portions of this file have been provided but Mr.
Peterson has not been provided with a complete copy of the fil e.
c. All reports, notes, correspondence, communications, audio and video

recordings and transcripts thereof, concerning the fire department and/or law
enforcement's decision to send the stained mattress fabric found in the back of the van to
the DOJ Central Valley Crime Lab for forensic testing in 2003.
Reason for believing items exist: The evidence was sent to the DOJ Central Valley Crime
Lab for forensic testing in 2003 but Mr. Peterson has not been provided with any reports
17
A sworn declaration by a person or persons with knowledge will be fi led in support of Mr. Peterson's Motion for
Post-Conviction Discovery pursuant to Penal Code section 1054.9, should that motion be necessary, attesting that 607
Empire was the address of Steven Todd's sister-in-law, Telesia Koen, the daughter of Cliff Koen, whose name Todd
provided as his unverified alibi for December 24, 2002.
29

LOS ANGELES
INNOCENCE
PROJECT
explaining the reasoning behind sending certain items of evidence collected from the van for
testing, and not others.
d. All documents relating to the collection of fingerprints, palm prints,

and/or latent prints from the van, as requested in the Incident History Report (Bates 4095)
and any subsequent examination, analysis, or comparisons of that print evidence.
Reason for believing items exist: Individuals involved in collecting evidence from the
van reported seeing print evidence being collected but Mr. Peterson has received no reports
documenting the results, nor has he been provided copies of any prints collected.
e. A complete color copy of MFD Fire Investigator Bryan Spitulski's

entire investigation file in Modesto Fire Department Case No. SMF02019142.
Reason for believing items exist: Former MFD Fire Investigator Bryan Spitulski has
stated in a sworn declaration that he has reviewed the reports he authored that were provided to
Mr. Peterson and that the reports are incomplete. He has further reviewed the discovery Mr.
Peterson was provided at the time of trial regarding the vehicle fire and stated that these
materials are incomplete. A sworn declaration to that effect will be filed in support of Mr.
Peterson's motion for post-conviction discovery, if that filing is necessary.
f. Color copies of all "photographs" and "scene diagrams" created of

the van, the scene where it was located, and any/all evidence collected therefrom, including
but not limited to:
(1) Full-sized, color copies of the black and white thumbnails, titled
PC2400 l 3.jpg-PC24004 l .jpg on pages Bates 4107-411 0;
(2) All "scene diagrams" created by Fire Investigator Bryan Spitulski as

refenced at Bates 4102, and/or by any other investigator;
(3) Color copies of all photographs of the van and its contents, including the
stained mattress, concrete cinder blocks, metal cans, and other items
located inside the van taken at the tow yard and MPD evidence locker
during the examination and collection of evidence from the van as
referenced at Bates 3781;
(4) Photographs depicting the cutting and sampling of the mattress fabric at
the "covered secure area," as referenced at Bates 3781. 18
18A sworn declaration by a person or persons attesting to the details of the procedures used and photographs taken
during the examination and collection of evidence from the van while it was at the police evidence locker will be
30

LOS ANGELES
INNOCENCE
PROJECT
Reason for believing items exist: See 4.d., above.
g. Property and Evidence logs and records, including chain of custody

from December 25, 2002, to the present, detailing the current location and condition of the
following items of evidence, and, where applicable, color photographs of the packaging, for
the following items:
{I) The burned orange van with license plate number 6S66512;
(2) The mattress fabric sample and other mattress material samples collected
from the above-described burned orange van;
(3) The glass vile used for presumptive testing of the mattress fabric sample,
which tested presumptively positive for the presence of as indicated in
color photographs and at Bates 3781;
(4) The red fuel container, metal fuel container, and yellow fuel containers
observed in the burned-out van, as indicated at Bates 4104;
(5) The towel found sticking out of the gas tank of the burned-out van
described above, as described at Bates 4103;
(6) The gas cap found lying on the ground near one of the tires of the burned-
out van described above, as indicated at Bates 4103;
(7) The cement cinder blocks found inside the burned van;
(8) The fabric cut from the "pillow" as indicated at Bates 3781;
(9) All other items collected from the van and/or the surrounding areas not
listed above.
( l 0) All destruction orders associated with the van and/or evidence collected
therefrom.
Reason for believing items exist: Information provided by Fire Inspector Bryan Spitulski
indicates in no uncertain terms that MPD upper management was aware of the evidence being
collected from the burned out orange van and concerned that it may have been involved in the
abduction of Laci Peterson. It stands to reason that evidence was carefully examined and tested,
but Mr. Peterson has received no investigation or lab reports indicating the above items were
forensically tested.
filed in support of Mr. Peterson's Motion for Post-Conviction Discovery pursuant to Penal Code section 1054.9,
should that motion be necessary.
31

LOS ANGELES
INNOCENCE
PROJECT
h. MPD Policy and Training Manuals in effect in 2002-2005, including
Homicide Detective Manuals, Police Investigation Manuals, and any other policy and
procedures in effect governing the following:
( 1) Documentation, collection, and preservation of physical evidence;

(2) Procedures for interviewing witnesses and suspects, including the
recording and documenting of such interviews;
(3) The utilization and administration of hypnosis on eyewitnesses;
(4) A voiding confirmation bias and other biases in police investigations;

(5) Documentation and disclosure of incentives offered to prosecution
witnesses in exchange for testimony;
(6) All policies and procedures pertaining to the administration,
documentation, and recording of polygraphs, including pre-polygraph and
post-confession interviews; and
(7) All policies and procedures pertaining to the use of confidential
informants, documentation of the identities of confidential informants,
decisions to offer leniency and/or deals in exchange for cooperation with
law enforcement, evaluation of Brady and discovery obligations when
using informants, and all other documents governing the use of
confidential informants.
i. MPD and MFD forensic evidence collection policies and procedures in
effect in 2002 and 2003.
j. The initial report(s) that MPD Evidence ID Tech Lovell's

"Supplemental Report" supplements. See Bates 3781.
k. All notes, reports, emails, voicemail recordings, and/or other internal

communications between MPD and/or MFD personnel on December 31, 2002, regarding
the presumptive positive blood test result from the mattress fabric cutting, about which the
police chief, fire chief, and city manager were all informed and who then responded to the
evidence locker to view the evidence. 19
19 A sworn declaration by a person or persons with knowledge attesting to the fact that the described personnel were
present at the MPD evidence locker, while the van was being processed, because law enforcement believed the van
may have been involved in Laci Peterson's abduction, will be filed in support of Mr. Peterson's Motion for Post-
Conviction Discovery pursuant to Penal Code section 1054.9, should that motion be necessary.
32

LOS ANGELES
INNOCENCE
PROJECT
1. All MPD and MFD reports, notes, photos, audio and video recordings
and transcripts thereof, documenting and/or memorializing all investigatory actions taken
in relation to sightings of a similar van in the La Loma neighborhood, immediately prior to
it being reported on fire the morning of December 25, 2002, including but not limited to:
(1) Mike Chiavette's interview with MPD reporting that he saw a "bright
orange Blazer type vehicle in East La Loma Park" that resembled the color
of a "Cal Trans" van with suspicious looking men standing nearby, and he
also saw a dog he recognized as the Petersons' dog, McKenzi, in the park
on the morning of December 24, 2002, as indicated at Bates 2721;
(2) The report called in by Patty - • who informed MPD that on

December 25, 2002, at 6:30 a.m. a "rust colored" van stalled out on her
street in front of her home atiil Highland Drive, within 1000 feet of the
Petersons' home, and a woman knocked on her door asking for gas, which
her husband provided to her, as indicated at Bates 14791;
(3) All reports related to any investigatory efforts to obtain information

related to an "orange Blazer," as indicated by the information called in by
Hession itlll at Bates 14775, and all information and/or witness
statements obtained pursuant to those efforts.
Reason for believing items exist: These reports are referenced in discovery Mr. Peterson
has been provided but he has received no police reports or other information that sets forth the
follow up investigation conducted into these leads, nor has he been provided with any discovery
concerning who the possible suspects were as to this crime or whether anyone was ever arrested
for it.
m. All MPD and MFD reports, notes, photos, audio and video recordings
and transcripts thereof, documenting and/or memorializing all investigatory actions taken
regarding the theft of the orange van, prior to its burning, including, but not limited to:
(1) Interviews with all witnesses, including but not limited to:
(A) Terry Borden;

(B) Dorth Borden;
(C) Mark-20•
(D) Robert 111 - AKA Bobby-;
20
The name "Mark . ,, and a date of birth is listed as a name "to appear" in MFD Fire Inspector Spitulski 's
December 31, 2002 report. However, there is no mention of that name in the body of the report.
33

LOS ANGELES
INNOCENCE
PROJECT
(E) Any of the other individuals encountered at the Borden
property on December 31, 2002.
(2) All reports submitted by all MFD personnel present on the scene,
including but not limited to Bryan Spitulski, Matthew Curless, Michael
Peterson, Django Valledor, and Delbert Jolly, as listed in Bates 4102;
(3) Police and fire reports, notes, interviews, and/or other documents
concerning the theft of another vehicle or trailer from the Borden's
business property roughly two weeks prior to the van fire on December
25, 2002, as Terry Borden relayed to Fire Investigator Bryan Spitulski;
(4) Investigation into all individuals who had access to the Borden van prior
to its apparent theft, including but not limited to a list of Borden's
employees;
(5) Investigation into whether the key to the van was with the van and/or
whether a copy of the key was in the possession of anyone associated with
the van;
(6) Investigation into Robert 11111 - (AKA Bobby RIii) criminal

history, including the burglary he was on probation for, which rendered
him searchable, as indicated in Det. Shipley's January 23, 2003 report;
(7) Color photographs, descriptions, inventory logs, or other documentation

related to the "miscellaneous tools, safe, and additional items" found in
Robert 4 - •s possession on December 31, 2002.
Reason for believing items exist: See Det. Shipley's January 23, 2003 report.21
n. All reports, notes, recordings, or other documents detailing

statements made by witnesses at the scene of the van fire, including but not limited to the
name and full statement made by the reporting party, who stated that the van was not
present in the alleyway when he went to sleep the night before.
o. A complete and thorough description of all locations within the MFD

and MPD's systems for cataloguing and storing reports, evidence, photos, and
21 Det. Shipley's report indicates that the items in Smith's possession were assessed by Sebron Banlcs to determine
whether they were associated with any of the burglary cases he was assigned to, and he found that they were not.
However, Sebron Banks was not assigned to the Medina Burglary, so the items in Smith's possession could very
well have been Medina property. On December 31, 2002, the Medina Burglary was not solved and none of the
Medina property had been recovered yet. Some Medina property was never recovered, even after the raids and
arrests in the Airport District on January 2, 2003.
34

LOS ANGELES
IMMOCEMCE
PROJECT
communications that Det. Grogan searched for discovery that is responsive to Mr.
Peterson's request in 2016 for investigation materials related to the van fire, including but
not limited to:
(1) All correspondence, including but not limited to email communications,
by and between District Attorney Birgit Fladager and Det. Craig Grogan
requesting a search for evidence related to the incendiary van fire, as
referenced in Det. Grogan' s 20 I 6 report;
(2) The complete MFD case file related to the investigation of the van fire,
MFD Case No. 02-19142, as referenced in Det. Grogan's 2016 report;
(3) The complete MPD case filed related to the investigation of the van fire,
MPD Case No. 02-142687, as referenced in Det. Grogan's 2016 report;
(4) Correspondence by and between Det. Grogan and the Department of
Justice Central Valley Crime Laboratory regarding the mattress cuttings,
as referenced in Det. Grogan's 2016 report;
(5) A complete copy of the Central Valley Crime Laboratory report regarding
the examination and forensic testing of the mattress cuttings, including but
not limited to serology testing and reports, bench notes, color photographs,
and all internal and external correspondence concerning the testing of
those items, as referenced in Det. Grogan' s 2016 report.
Reason for believing items exist: See Det. Grogan's March 18, 2016 Report.
5. EYEWITNESSES WHO REPORTED SEEING LACI PETERSON ON OR

AFTER DECEMBER 24, 2002.
a. All reports, audio and video recordings and transcripts thereof,

photos, notes, and/or other documents detailing investigative actions taken in response to
eyewitness accounts reporting sightings of Laci Peterson on or after December 24, 2002,
including, but not limited to:
(1) Maps of search areas, the names of officers assigned, and the search areas
assigned to each officer. Materials developed or used by law enforcement
in 2002 and/or early 2003 while Laci was missing to note or track possible
December 24, 2002 neighborhood sightings of Laci, McKenzi, or of a
woman walking a dog.
(2) All reports r e ~ any interview(s) by Det. Reid or any other officer
with Colleen . t _ , who reported to MPD on December 30, 2002, that
"[o]n 12/24 between 1000-1030 hrs she was backing out of her driveway
when she saw someone that looked like Laci." See Bates 14828.
35

LOS ANGELES
INNOCENCE
PROJECT
(3) All repo11s reflecting any interview(s) regarding infom1ation Homer
and/or Helen Maldonado provided to Sgt. Ron Cloward on Januruy 3,
2003, while Laci was still missing, that Mr. Maldonado saw Laci Peterson
walking her dog in the La Loma neighborhood on December 24, 2002, and
all repol1s reflecting any follow up interview regarding that same
information Homer and/or Helen Maldanado provided to MPD Chaplain
Crocker on January 14, 2003.22 See Bates 14865.
(4) All reports reflecting any interview(s) while Laci was still missing with
Tony Freitas, who reported to MPD on December 30, 2002, that he
" [s)aw Laci on 12-24-02 about 10:00 a.m." walking the dog in a northwest
direction on La Loma, near the location where Homer Maldonado reported
seeing Laci ru·ound that same time.23 See Bates 14818. The location
where Freitas repo11ed seeing Laci on La Loma is the precise location
where and the bloodhound scent dog, named Merlin, belonging to Contra
Costa Sheriffs Department Seru·ch and Rescue dog handler Cindee
Valentin, trailed Laci's scent on December 26, 2002.
(5) All repo11s reflecting any inte1view(s) while Laci was still missing by Det.
Grogan or any other officer to interview Sharon - • who repo11ed
she "might have seen Laci Peterson" on La Loma Just south of the bridge
"on Christmas Eve, not far from the location where Maldonado and Freitas
repo11ed seeing Laci, the morning of December 24, 2002.24 See Bates
15095.
(6) All reports reflecting any inte1view(s) while Laci was still missing with
Rebecca .tllli,who reported on December 26 and 27, 2002 that her
neighbors atJIII
Covena saw the "missing person walking her golden
retriever west on La Loma Ave near Santa Bru·bara." See Bates 14745,
2745.
22
A swom declaration by persons with knowledge attesting to the multiple reports the Madonados made to MPD
will be filed in support of Mr. Peterson's Motion for Post-Conviction Discovery pmsuant to Penal Code section
1054.9, should that motion be necessary.
23A swom declaration by a person with knowledge attesting to the repoti Freitas made to MPD will be filed in
support of Mr. Peterson's Motion for Post-Conviction Discovery pmsuaut to Penal Code section 1054.9, should that
24 A swom declaration by a person attesting to the fact that Paulson recently confirmed that she made the above-
described report to MPD will be filed in suppot1 of Mr. Peterson's Motion for Post-Conviction Discovery plll'Suaut
to Penal Code section 1054.9, should that motion be necessary.
36

1800 Paseo Rane.h o Castilla, Los Angeles CA, 90032
LOS ANGELES
INNOCENCE
PROJECT
Frank and Martha Aguilar at 215 Covena, refenced in (5). See Bates
2745.
Vivian ("Reagean" [sic]) Mitchell who called MPD on January 1, 2003,
to report that on December 24, 2002, between 10:00 and 10:30 a.m., she
"saw a lady who fits the description of Laci who was walking a golden
retriever." See Bates 14871.
(9) All reports reflecting any interview(s) while Laci was still missing by Inv.
Bertalotto or other officer with Gene Pedrioli who reported to MPD that
he saw Laci the morning of her disappearance on the west side of the park
with her dog. 25 See Bates 13586.
Rachel -• who reported seeing a woman walking her dog on Wilson
Avenue and "was yelling at her dog to 'Corne back, [c]ome back" because
the dog had gotten away from her." See Bates 4556, 15052.
(11) Det. Grogan's notes or report detailing his December 26, 2002 interview
with Mike Chiavette, as referenced by Detective Brocchini. Chiavette
reported seeing the Peterson' s dog being walked on the footpath where
Covena dead-ends. See Bates 978, 2721.
(12) All reports reflecting any interview(s) while Laci was still missing by Det.
Grogan or any other officer on the December 29, 2002 call from city
worker John - who reported seeing a white, pregnant woman
walking a dog m La Loma Park the morning of December 24, 2002. See
Bates 2106.
Thomas ("Tom") Harshman, who reported to MPD on December 28,
2002, that he had just seen a pregnant woman fitting Laci' s description
who appeared to be under duress getting into a van on Scenic Road, near
Claus Road.26 See Bates 14789 (Thomas Harsh), 14791, 41005-41006,
15462.
25 A sworn declaration by a person with knowledge attesting to these facts will be filed in support of Mr. Peterson's
26 A sworn declaration by a person or persons with knowledge attesting to these facts will be filed in support of Mr.
necessary.
37

LOS ANGELES
IMMOCEHCE
PROJECT
(14) Any photos of Laci Peterson or other women used during interviews with
eyewitnesses to determine whether they saw Laci, or in the alternative,
identified another woman.
(15) Any photos of the Peterson dog, McKenzi, or other dogs that were used
during eyewitness interviews to determine whether they saw McKenzi, or
in the alternative, identified another dog.
(16) The identity of "two other pregnant women walking that day," as
described by Det. Brocchini in his interview with Fox News
Correspondent Laura Ingle that aired March 30, 2023.
(17) Notes of interviews with any eyewitnesses who reported seeing Laci
Peterson alive on December 24, 2002, in the possession of and/or created
by the Stanislaus County District Attorney's Office.
6. EYEWITNESSES WHO REPORTED TO MPD THAT THEY HAD SEEN
THE PETERSONS' DOG, McKENZI, ALONE AND UNATTENDED IN THE LA LOMA
NEIGHBORHOOD THE MORNING OF DECEMBER 24, 2004.
a. All reports, audio and video recordings and transcripts thereof,
reflecting any interview(s) while Laci was still missing, with the following witnesses who
called MPD and reported seeing a dog fitting McKenzi's description walking alone,
unattended in the La Loma neighborhood the morning of December 24, 2002:
(1) Leora Garcia reported to the MPD on January 7, 2003, that she was a
driving instructor and was in the La Loma neighborhood the morning of
December 24, when she saw an older orange dog, by itself.27 The dog had
a leash. On January 10, 2003, MPD Officer Hicks reported that he called
Ms. Garcia and spoke to her on the phone (i.e., without showing her a
photo of McKenzi) and he "determined [over the phone] that the dog was
not the same dog belonging to the Peterson." See Bates 4466. Mr.
Peterson has received no discovery explaining on what basis the MPD
determined the dog Ms. Garcia saw was not McKenzi.28
27
A sworn declaration by a person or persons with knowledge attesting to these facts will be filed in support of Mr.
Peterson's Motion for Post-Conviction Discovery pursuant to Penal Code section I054.9, should that motion be
necessary.
28On December 18, 2003, Officer Hicks conducted a follow up interview with Ms. Garcia. While Mr. Peterson is in
possession of an audio recording of the interview, no report documenting the circumstances of that interview or any
follow up investigation into the information provided in that interview, including an additional description of the van
she saw and a partial license plate number, have been provided to the defense. Accordingly, we request that the
report corresponding to the December 18, 2003 interview and any related subsequent investigation be provided.
38

LOS ANGELES
INNOCENCE
PROJECT
(2) Victoria . . . repo11ed to MPD Officer R. Beffa on December 25,
2002, that ~ s j ogging in the park the day before between 9:30 and 10
a.m., on December 24, and she saw a gold-colored dog with a leash on.
The dog was on the north side of Diy C~ cing back and fo1th and
barking "like crazy." See Bates 2716. i . _ was contacted again on
January 1, 2003, by an officer doing a door-to-door canvas and she again
reported that she saw a large yellowish dog nmning loose in the park,
north of the Covena dead end (which is near the Petersons' home). 29 See
Bates 2426. Mr. Peterson has not received any investigative~
indicating that the police or prosecution followed up on Ms. ~
account.
(3) Barbara ialllll called the MPD and repo1ted that she had seen a golden
retriever-typ
~ with a red leash walking by itself at approximately
11 :30.30 See Bates 14752. Mr. Peterson has not received any
investig~ orts indicating that the police or prosecution followed up
on Ms. ~ s account.
(4) John - called MPD on December 27, 2002, to repo11 that "a couple
of days ago, ' he saw a large golden dog rnnning around loose in the
Haddon area. The dog was wearing a collar but he did not notice a leash.
See Bates 14775. Mr. Peterson has not received any investigative rep01ts
indicating that the police or prosecution followed up on Mr. itlllls
account.
(5) Linda ~ called MPD on December 27, 2002, and repo11ed that
she was~ her dog two or three days prior and saw a golden
retriever with a collar and tags. The dog ran away from her. See Bates
14768. Mr. Peterson has not been provide~~ ports indicating
that investigators ever followed up on Ms. ~ •s account.
7. MISSING BATES PAGES. There were at least two Bates numbering
systems used in the discovery for this case, so many discovery pages have two Bates
stamps--one at the bottom right and one at top center. The Bates number on the bottom
right became the controlling Bates number and exceeded over 43,000 pages. Generally, the
top center Bates was used by MPD for internal reports or documents filed with internal
29 A sworn declaration by a person or persons with knowledge attesting to these facts will be filed in support of Mr.
necessary.
30 Asworn declaration by a person or persons with knowledge attesting to these facts will be filed in support of Mr.
necessary.
39

LOS ANGELES
IHHOCEHCE
PROJECT
reports. Based on this, please provide the following discovery, which has never to date
been provided to Mr. Peterson:
a. Pages that have a TOP CENTER Bates stamp number:
(1) 2495 (likely handwritten);

(2) 2592 (likely handwritten);
(3) 12260-12265;
(4) 14340-14402;
(5) 16469-16491;
(6) 17220-17595;
(7) 25889;
(8) 26712-26713.
b. Pages that have a BOTTOM RIGHT Bates stamp number:

(1) 4759 (likely has handwritten 4751 at top center);
(2) 5300-5309;
(3) 10681- 10684;
(4) 15821 ;
(5) 16220;
(6) 16523- 16544 (likely has Bates 16469- 16491 at top center);
(7) 20323-20324;
(8) 21696-21697 (likely has Bates 21303-21304 at top center);
(9) 22527;
(10) 22871;
(11) 23908-23909;
(12) 25166-25220;
(13) 26313-26314;
(14) 26771-26778;
(15) 32892;
(16) 33770;
(17) 34030;
(18) 35082;
(19) 35088-35089;
(20) 38181;
(21) 41297;
(22) 41737-41747 (likely has Bates 27817-27827 at top center);
(23) 42857-42903;
(24) 43084-43088;
40

LOS ANGELES
INNOCENCE
PROJECT
(25) 43098-43152;
(26) 43214 and above.
8. GENE RALSTON REPORTS, VIDEOS AND OTHER DATA RELATED

TO BAY SEARCHES.
a. Any reports or notes authored by MPD Sgt. Cloward, and/or correspondence
between Gene Ralston and Sgt. Cloward, regarding their mid-February 2003 discussion
about an object captured by sonar imaging on January 24, 2003, that measured 5.3 feet in
length and appeared to have two small objects on opposite sides of one end, referenced in
Gene Ralston's 2003 report.
b. All names of CARDA personnel and animals that "responded during the
weekend of March 6 and 7" to assist Ralston & Associates with searches and all reports,
notes, logs, photos, and audio or video recordings detailing the searches and alerts that
occurred during this search.
c. Any photos or video footage obtained when Ralston suggested "the video
camera be used to tape the monitor output" members of the search team viewed of the
ROV aboard the boat.
d. Any video recording made of Target 1.
e. Any screen captures, photos, or other images of the video image or video of
Target 1 that Gene Ralston considered to be of a human body.
f. Copies of any computer hard drives or computer files that contain the images
displayed by the ROV.
g. Video of the Klamath County, Oregon, search locating victims which Ralston
believed resembled "the form and substance observed in the video of Target 1."
h. Gene Ralston's images and search data referenced in Det. Hendee's report
dated July 31, 2003. See Bates 22019-22020.
i. The 18 or 19 images Gene Ralston sent to Clayton Fenn of Inters pace

Exploration, including images from March 12- 13, 2003, that Ralston thought were images
of a body, referenced in Det. Hendee's report dated July 31, 2003. See Bates 22020.
41

LOS ANGELES
INNOCENCE
PROJECT
j. All side scan sonar images and video taken on March 28 and 29, 2003
referenced in Gene Ralston's 2003 report.
k. All communications and correspondence from January 1, 2003, to date,

including but not limited to email correspondence and text messages, between MPD,
including Sgt. Ron Cloward, and Gene or Sandra Ralston, concerning any evidence in this
case and the search for Laci Peterson.31
l. All communications and correspondence from January 1, 2003, to date,

including but not limited to email correspondence and text messages, between any
personnel from other agencies and/or other parties involved in the San Francisco Bay
searches and Gene or Sandra Ralston. See Gene Ralston's 2003 report, referencing
"intermittent contact with several other officers and detectives throughout the
investigation."
m. All MPD reports, notes, memoranda, and communications with other law
enforcement agencies involved in underwater searches in San Francisco Bay, discussing the
merits of Mr. Ralston's opinion that Laci Peterson's body was not deposited in the location
MPD and the prosecution claimed and the reasons for rejecting his opinion. Mr. Peterson
has received no discovery regarding this topic.
9. ALL REPORTS, VIDEOS, AND OTHER DATA RELATED TO BAY

SEARCHES.
a. MPD Sgt. Ron Cloward's report detailing his activities at the San
Francisco Bay on March 11, 2003.
b. MPD Det. Owen's report detailing his activities at the San Francisco Bay
on March 11, 2003, as referred to in Det. Grogan's report. See Bates 663 (handwritten on
top of page).
c. Report obtained from Deputy Rick Rutherford of Tuolumne County

detailing his activities at the San Francisco Bay on March 11, 2003.
31 Gene Ralston reported to a journalist in 2023 that he and Sgt. Ron Cloward communicated regularly throughout
the search for Laci Peterson and that they remain in contact with one another to the present day. A declaration
recounting Ralston's report will be filed in support of Mr. Peterson's Motion for Post-Conviction Discovery
pursuant to Penal Code section 1054.9, should that motion be necessary.
42

1800 Paseo Rancho Castilla. Los Ange les CA, 90032
LOS ANGELES
INNOCENCE
PROJECT
d. MPD Det. Phil Owen's report detailing the activities at the San Francisco
Bay on March 17, 18, and 19, 2003. See Bates 21639-21640.
e. All ofMPD Det. Grogan's communications with the FBI regarding

underwater searches conducted in San Francisco Bay. See, e.g., Bates 91832.
f. All photos, images, video, reports taken by John Demille from Marine
Sonic on May 22, 2003.32
g. All reports from law enforcement personnel or others assisting law

enforcement in the San Francisco Bay searches, including from the follo,ving personnel
who were present during the searches, none of whom have provided any reports to Mr.
Peterson about their search activities:
DATE AGENCY PERSONNEL REFERENCED

PRESENT,NO AT BATES
REPORT
PROVIDED
12/28/2002 Contra Costa Sheriff Department Tom Gill 2918;
Mike Boehrer 2654-2655A
Jim Lambert
Chris Lauitzen
John Humphrey
Ed Malascon
Charlie Rojas
Eloise Anderson
Marine Unit
Marine Patrol Unnamed 2918
California Rescue Dog Association Denise Blackman 2918
Ron Seitz
Eloise Anderson
Modesto Police Department Marine Dept. 2918;
K-9 Officers 3021-3074
Alameda County Sheriff Department Ron Seitz 2654-2655A
Richmond Police Department J. Silva 3071- 3074
San Francisco Police Deoartment Marine Unit 3071- 3074
12/30/2002 Modesto Police Department Andy Schlenker 20299
Rick Armendariz
32 Mr. Peterson has

received discovery labeled Day 1 through Day 3 and Day 5, but is missing anything related to
Day 4 or May 22, 2003 from John Demille.
43

Herttberg-Davis Forensic Science Center - Cal State LA
1800 Paseo Rancho casfilla, Los Angeles CA, 90032
LOS ANGELES
INNOCENCE
PROJECT
12/31/2002 Coast Guard "Petty Officer 1803-1810
Castillo"
Ken Langford
JeffBouchev
01/04/2003 Alameda Cotmty Sheriff Department R. Seitz 21609-21610
Search and Rescue B. McCabe
R. Soares
D.Lee
Storck
G. Chiu
Miller
M. Wagner
B. Weber
F. Roelfsema
M. Noms
R. Carlson
Z. Helstrom
J. Millie
Ha11
Alameda Cotmty Sheriff Depa11ment J. Nagel 21609-21610
Unde1water Rescue/Recovery J. McPartland
T. Cahil
D. Garabedian
B. Matapoulos
R. Pokorny
R. Valerio
D. Branson
Alameda County Sheriff Depai1ment D. Edick 21609-21610
"m u-9" G. Gleeson
01/08/2003 San Mateo Sheriff Depa11ment Walter Williams 2656
Geoffrey Baehr
George Cai·ey
Sgt. Gonzales
KenArdens
Thomas McEvov
01/09/2003 San Mateo Sheriff Department Walter Williams 2656
Geoffrey Baehr
George Carey
Sgt. Gonzales
KenArdens
Thomas McEvov
Modesto Police Deoartment Ron Cloward 21611-21612
44

LOS ANGELES
INNOCENCE
PROJECT
Alameda County Sheriff Department R. Knabe 21611- 21612
Search and Rescue E. Sheets
B. Jenevein
J. Miille
C. Miller
B. Weber
S. Corey
A. Rateaver
J. Nichols
M. Wagner
A. Bach
Z. Helstrom
M.Nonis
P. Sales
R. Soares
D. Lee
R. Seitz (SAR Chief)
K. Crawford
M. Caunday
J. Ward
R. Wagner
D.Brown
Alameda County SheriffDepa11ment G. Battaglia (URU 21611- 21612
Underwater Rescue/Recovery Chief)
D.McMw·die
D. Fugere
R. Happ
J. Bryan
D. Brown
D. Panzica
R. Storer
A. Zafers
J. Bueno
N.Lann
R. Fish
Alameda County Sheriff Depa11ment J. Wolfe 21611-21612
"mu-11"
01/11/2003 San Mateo Sheriff Department Walter Williams 2656
Geoffrey Baehr
George Carey
Sgt. Gonzales
KenArdens
Thomas McEvoy
45

LOS ANGELES
INNOCENCE
PROJECT
Modesto Police Department Mike Zahr 1846-1853
Chris Fuzie
Jason Grogan
Ron Cloward
Carlos Rodriguez
Veronica Holmes
Berkeley Police Department Eric Gustafson 1846-1853
Ed Galvan
G. Craig
Stanislaus County District Attorney Birgit Fladager 1846-1853
Rick Distasso
Alameda County Sheriff Department Darryl Brown 1846-1853
P. Sales
Andrea Zaferes
Alameda County Sheriff Department A. Chew 21613-21614
Search and Rescue R. Collins
L. Wilcox
R. Knabe
K. Crawford
K. Jones
D. Gallagher
S. League
B. Weber
R. Bedford
J. Nichols
K. Laidlaw
Z. Helstrom
P. Miyashiro
D. Dong
R. Soares
J. Ward
T. Allread
D. Lee
E. Sheets
M. Norris
A. Wright
R. Ericson
Alameda County Sheriff Department J. Pacheco 21613-21614
"mu-11 " N. Neil
R. Storer
D. McMurdle
J. Bryan
M. Vail
46

I 800 Paseo Rancho Castilla, Los Angeles CA, 90032
LOS ANGELES
INNOCENCE
PROJECT
B. Bussell
D. McCormick
J. Wolfe
F. Butler
B. Bennett
Alameda County Sheriff Department R. Fish 21613-21614
Undeiwater Rescue and Recove1y R. Happ
S.Sutton
J. Bueno
Solano County Sheriff Department Chris Cook 1846-1853
U.S. Coast Guard Unnamed 1846-1853
San Mateo Sheriff Department Unnamed 1846-1853
01/24/2003 Modesto Police Depattment MikeZahr 1864-1868
Ron Cloward
Berkeley Police Department Ed Galvan 1864-1868
G. Craig
01/27/2003 U.S. Coast Guat·d Ken Langford 1871- 1872
Paula Andrieu
Jonathan Wall
Modesto Police Department Mike Zahr 1871- 1872
Skultetv
01/28/2003 U.S. Coast Guard Ken Langford 1872- 1875
Paul Audtieu
Jonathan Wall
02/01/2003 Modesto Police Department C. Ramirez 2145
San Mateo Sheriff Depa1tment Walter Williams 2145
Mike Otte
Sean MacDonald
GeoggBarie
Joan Hooper
TomMcEvoy
Geonze Carev
San Francisco Police Department Danny Lopez 2145
San Mateo She1iffDepattment, Tom Smith 2657
"EOD," ''Marine Three" Mat·k Flaherty
Mark Potter
Capt. Williams
02/02/2003 San Mateo Sheriff Department, Tom Smith 2663- 2668;
"EOD," ''Marine Three," "Cliff and Dino Zografos 2232- 2233
Water Rescue Team" Mark Potter
Capt. Williams
TomMcEvov
47

LOS ANGELES
INNOCENCE
PROJECT
Walt Williams
Geoffrey Barie
George Carey
Joan Hooper
Modesto Police Deoaitment Ron Clowru·d 2232-2233
San Francisco Police Department DannvLopez 2232-2233
02/03/2003 Regional Parks Police Randy Parent 2408-2409
Kevin lacovoni
Modesto Police Department MikeZahr 1922-1926
Craig Grogan
Rudy Skultety
Veronica Holmes
California Highway Patrol Russ Vaugh 2670
David Power
02/08/2003 San Francisco Police Department Greg Latus 2406-2407A;
2671-2673
California Rescue Dog Association; Billy Wong 2406-2407A;
Alameda County Rescue Dogs, Mary Wong 2671-2673
"OES» Denise Blackman
Berkeley Police Deoartment Ed Galvan 2406-2407A
San Mateo SheriffDepa1tment Walter Williruns 2406-2407A;
Geoff Barie 2671-2673
TomMcEvoy
Geonze Carev
02/09/2003 Modesto Police Depai1ment Ron Cloward 2234-2235
Phil Owen
San Mateo SheriffDepa1tment TomMcEvoy 2234-2235
Walt Williams
Geoffrey Barie
Joan Hoooer
San Francisco Police Depm1ment Mark Potter 2234-2235;
Jay Dowke 2674-2699
Tom Smith
Danny Lopez
Private Search Pru1y Don Laughlin 2234-2235
William Laughlin
02/16/2003 San Mateo Sheriff Department Jeff Bare 2700
W. Williams
George Carey
John Drews
Modesto Police Department MikeZahr 1896-1900
Ron Cloward
48

LOS ANGELES
INNOCENCE
PROJ E CT
02/20/2003 San Francisco Police Department Danny Lopez 1896-1900
- Greg Latus
02/21/2003 MarkLaherly
Mike Stasco
Darby Reid
Jason Sawyer
Lian Frost
John Ferrando
Nick Rainford
02/23/2003 San Mateo Sheriff Department Jeff Bare 2700
- W. Williams
02/25/2003 George Carey
John Drews
02/26/2003 Modesto Police Department Ron Cloward 1906-1909
San Francisco Police Department Danny Lopez 1906-1909
Mark Laherly
Greg Latus
Mike Stasco
Darby Reid
Jason Sawyer
Liean Frost
John Fernando
Nick Rainford
Jason Gardon
JavDowke
San Mateo Police Depaitment Walt Williams 1906-1909
03/01/2003 California Rescue Dog Association Phil Wong 1912-1917;
- 2702-2703;
03/04/200333 2705-2707
San Mateo SheriffDepa1tment John Koerner 2705-2707
Walt Williams
Modesto Police Depaitmeut Ron Clowai·d 1912-1917
Denick Tyler
LarrvMever
Sonar Technician Don Lamzhton 1912- 1917
Tuolumne County Sheriff Department Rich Rutherford 1912- 1917
Bob Steel
John Zeeman
Richmond Police Deoartment Joel Thompson 1912-1917
33These searches are grouped together as a range between March 1-4, 2003, as the dates on the reports in Mr.
Peterson's possession contradict one another, making it unclear on which days these searches actually occurred.
Accordingly, Mr. Peterson requests that all reports for the named individuals in this date range be produced.
49

LOS ANGELES
INNOCENCE
PROJECT
Rebecca Ireland
03/11/200334 Modesto Police Department Ron Cloward No Bates, see
Phil Owen Grogan Report
dated 3/12/03
Tuolumne County Sheriff Department Unnamed No Bates, see
Grogan Report
dated 3/12/03
03/12/200335 Modesto Police Department Ron Cloward No Bates, see
Grogan Repo1t
dated 3/13/03
03/13/2003 Modesto Police Department Ron Cloward 16911;
Carlos Ramirez No Bates, see
Phil Owen Grogan Rep01t
dated 3/ 13/03
Tuolumne County Sheriff Department Rick Rutherford 16911;
Bob Steele No Bates, see
Norman Bettencowt Grogan Report
dated 3/13/03
San Francisco Divers Unnamed No Bates, see
Grogan Report
dated 3/13/03
03/1 7/2003 Modesto Police Department Phil Owen 21639- 21640
- Ron Cloward No Bates, see
03/19/200336 Carlos Ramirez Grogan Report
dated 3/ 17/03
Tuolumne Cotmty Sheriff Department Unnamed 21639-21640;
Dive Team No Bates, see
Grogan Rep01t
dated 3/ 17/03
Modesto Police Department Ron Cloward 23416-23418;
34 For this date, Mr. Peterson has only a single report from Det. Grogan recounting a phone briefing about the bay
search from Sgt. Cloward. Mr. Peterson has no reports from anyone actually present at the bay that day.
35 Again,
as with March 11, 2003, the only report Mr. Peterson is in possession of dealing with the bay search on
March 12, 2003, is a phone briefing for Det. Grogan.
36For these dates, the only report from anyone present for the bay search that Mr. Peterson is in possession of is a
report dated May 14, 2003, authored by Sgt. Al Carter (See Bates 21639- 21640), in which Carter states that "For
three days starting from sunrise and ending at sundown, March 17-19, 2003" he assisted with a search of the bay
with other MPD persoiu1el and the Tuolumne County Sheriff's Department Dive Team. Sgt. Carter's repo11
explicitly refers to a "full detailed report by Det. Phil Owens." No such report has ever been disclosed to Mr.
Peterson. Aside from Sgt. Carter's report authored months after the event, the only reports including any
information about the bay searches conducted on these days are SUlllU13ry of briefings Det. Grogan received via
phone.
50
Los Angeles Innocence Proj ect

Hertzberg-Davis Forensic Science Center - Cal Stale LA
LOS ANGELES
IMMOCEMCE
PROJECT
03/25/2003 Rudy Sl.'Ultety 21640
- Veronica Holmes
03/27/2003 San Francisco Police Department Danny Lopez 23416-23418;
Mark Tozer 21640
Gre~ Latus
Tuolumne County Sheriff Department Rick Rutherford 23416-23418;
Scott Johnson 21640
Jeff Perlewitz
Gre2 Wolf
U.S. Coast Guard Sal Rodri~uez 23416-23418
In Shore Divers KevinPehle 23416-23418;
Gene Purtell 21640
Shane Hunter
03/28/2003 Modesto Police Depattment Rudy Sl.-ttltety 2419
R. Pouv
Derek Tyler
California Rescue Do~ Association Unnamed 2419
03/29/2003 San Mateo Sheiiff Depattment John Koerner 26674-26675
Modesto Police Depattment Deni ck Tyler 26674-26675;
2382
10. COMPUTER FORENSICS. Please provide all notes, reports,

communications, memoranda, audio and video r ecordings, and other records
documenting MPD,s use of scent dogs in See Bates 179. Mr. Peterson was not provided
with any computer forensic reports indicating what time he turned his work computer on
at his office on December 24, 2002.
11. SCE NT DOGS. Please provide all notes, reports, communications,

memoranda, audio and video recordings, and other records documenting MPD,s use of
scent dogs in the search for Laci Peterson in 2002 and 2003, including but not limited to
the following:
a. All notes, audio and video r ecordings, photos, dra,vings, maps,

reports, recorded radio transmissions, voicemails, and other communications between
MPD and Contra Costa Shel"iff's Department Search and Rescue scent dog handler
Cindee Valentin related to her scent dog Merlin's search on the evening of December 26,
2002, that commenced at 523 Covena Avenue and was terminated in the Airport District.
b. All audio and video r ecordings, photos, drawings, maps, reports,

recorded radio transmissions, voicemails, and other communications behveen MPD a nd
Contra Costa Sheriffs Depa rtment Search and Rescue dog handler Cindee Valentin
51

1800 Paseo Rancho castilla, Los Angeles CA, 90032
LOS ANGELES
INNOCENCE
PROJECT
related to her scent dog Merlin's search on the evening of December 26, 2002, that
occurred in the vicinity of 1027 N. Emerald Avenue.
c. All audio and video recordings, photos, drawings, maps, reports,

recorded radio transmissions, voicemails, and other communications between MPD and
Contra Costa Sherifrs Department Search and Rescue dog handler Eloise Anderson
related to her cadaver dog Twist's search of Mr. Peterson's truck on December 27, 2002,
and Det. Hendee's decision and instruction to Ms. Anderson that she not put Twist into
Mr. Peterson's truck as part of MPD's investigation into Laci Peterson's disappearance,
despite law enforcement's suspicion that Mr. Peterson transported his wife's body in the
back of his truck.
d. All audio and video recordings, photos, drawings, maps, reports,

recorded radio transmissions, voicemails, and other communications not previously
provided in discovery related to the many cadaver dog alerts that occurred on the San
Francisco Bay during the underwater searches from January through October 2003,
including the searches Mr. Ralston and numerous law enforcement agencies participated
in around Buoy 4.
e. All audio and video recordings, photos, drawings, maps, reports,

recorded radio transmissions, voicemails, and other communications documenting the
activities of scent and cadaver dogs deployed at Berkeley Marina, including reports by all
witnesses who observed the scent dog alerting to Laci's scent on the west dock, rather
than on the east dock, where Mr. Peterson tied up his boat when he put it boat in the
water on December 24, 2002.
12. MODESTO POLICE DEPARTMENT AND STANISLAUS COUNTY

DISTRICT ATTORNEY OFFICE POLICIES IN PLACE IN 2002-2005 GOVERNING
DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST CONCERNING PERSONAL
AND/OR ROMANTIC RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN PROSECUTORS AND MPD
PERSONNEL WORKING ON THE SAME CASE. Please provide:
a. MPD policy manuals, Human Resources procedures for employees,

and all other information setting forth the policies in place in 2002-2005 requiring that
management be notified of any personal and/or romantic relationship with another
member of law enforcement, including employees of the Stanislaus County District
Attorney's Office, for purposes of avoiding a conflict of interest.
b. Stanislaus County District Attorney' s Office policy manuals,

Human Resources procedures for employees, and all other information setting forth the
policies in place in 2002- 2005 requiring that management be notified of any personal
52

LOS ANGELES
INNOCENCE
PROJECT
and/or romantic relationship with another member of law enforcement, including
employees of MPD, for purposes of avoiding a conflict of interest.37
c. Policies in place 2002-2005 governing the handling of conflicts of

interest, including the disclosure to defendants of personal and/or romantic relationship
between a member of law enforcement investigating a defendant' s case and a trial
prosecutor, including but not limited to the notification requirement when the trial
deputy is involved with an investigating officer she calls to the stand and examines as part
of the prosecution's case in chief.38
d. All disclosures provided and waivers sought by MPD and/or

Stanislaus County District Attorney's Office informing Mr. Peterson ,s defense of any
conflicts of interest among trial prosecutors and testifying MPD officers.
13. ANY NEW REPORTS, LEADS, EVIDENCE, OR TIPS RECEIVED BY

MPD OR ANY OTHER LAW ENFORCMENT AGENCY SINCE THE DATE OF MR.
PETERSON'S CONVICTION IDENTIFYING INDIVIDUALS OTHER THAN MR.
PETERSON AS POSSIBLY INVOLVED OR RESPONSIBLE FOR THE
DISAPPEARANCE AND DEATHS OF LACI AND CONNER PETERSON.
14. AUDIO AND VIDEO RECORDINGS OF MPD INTERVIEWS WITH AND

SURVEILLANCE OF SCOTT PETERSON AND TRANSCRIPTS THEREOF, NOT YET
PROVIDED. Please provide:
a. All audio and video recordings of MPD's interviews with Mr.

Peterson beginning December 24, 2002, through April 30, 2003, including but not limited to
the following:
( 1) Interviews various MPD officers conducted with Mr. Peterson on

December 24, 2002, beginning at approximately 6:30 p.m. up to Det.
37
See National District Attorneys Association, National Prosecution Standards (3rd ed. 2009) 1-3.3(d) [Specific
Conflicts: "The prosecutor should excuse himself or herself from any investigation, prosecution, or other matter
where personal interests of the prosecutor would cause a fair-minded, objective observer to conclude that the
prosecutor's neutrality, judgment, or ability to administer the law in an objective manner may be compromised."); 1-
3.4 [Conflict Handling "Each prosecutor's office should establish procedures for handling actual or potential
conflicts of interest. These procedures should include, but are not limited to: a. The creation of firewalls and taint or
filter teams to ensure that prosecutors with a conflict are not improperly exposed to infonnation or improperly
disclose information; and b. Methods to accurately document the manner in which conflicts were handled to ensure
public trust and confidence in the prosecutor's office" (emphasis added).].
38
A sworn declaration by a person or persons attesting to the fact that several MPD and SCDA employees have
reported that at the time of Mr. Peterson's trial in 2004 and 2005, it was common knowledge that Det. Craig Grogan
and ODA Birgit Fladager were involved in a romantic relationship, which was witnessed by others, will be filed in
support of Mr. Peterson's Motion for Post-Conviction Discovery pursuant to Penal Code section 1054.9, should that
53

LOS ANGELES
INNOCENCE
PROJECT
Brocchini's videotaped interview with him at MPD, which has been
provided to the defense. Please include recordings made in Det.
Brocchini's official vehicle while he was driving Mr. Peterson around
Modesto on the evening of December 24, 2002, and interviewing him
throughout that time;
(2) Interviews MPD officers, including Det. Craig Grogan, conducted with
Mr. Peterson on December 25, 2002, while Mr. Peterson was at the MPD
located in various rooms, including interview rooms. Please include all
recordings of the pre-polygraph interview Doug Mansfield conducted, or
attempted to conduct, on that date. Please also provide video recordings
made by cameras at the MPD lobby, captured at approximately 4:00-5:00
p.m. on December 25, 2002, showing Lee and Jackie Peterson asking for
their son to be released from custody;
(3) Interviews MPD officers, including Chris Boyer, Craig Grogan, Allen
Brocchini, and others, conducted with Mr. Peterson at his home prior to
executing search warrants on his property on December 26, 2002;
(4) Interviews MPD officers, including Det. Craig Grogan, conducted with
Mr. Peterson on January 3, 2003, while he was in various interview rooms
at MPD. Please include the recording of the pre-polygraph interview
Doug Mansfield conducted or attempted to conduct on that date.
b. All audio and video recordings of MPD's surveillance of Mr. Peterson

beginning December 24, 2002, through April 30, 2003, not yet provided, including but not
limited to video recordings captured by the pole camera MPD surreptitiously placed
outside the Petersons' home in December 2002-January 2003.
Please let me know if your office would like to set up a time to meet and confer regarding
these requests. I look forward to hearing from you.
Best regards,
~
Paula Mitchell
Director
cc: Donna Provenzano
54

EXHIBIT B
GmaH Paula Mitchell <[email protected]>
People v. Scott Peterson - Informal 1054.9 Discovery Letter

Paula Mitchell <[email protected]> Tue, Nov 14, 2023 at 11 :42 AM
To: Jeffrey. [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Bee: Eliza Haney <[email protected]>, Hilary Morman <[email protected]>, Paige McGrail
<[email protected]>
Dear Mr. Laugero,
The Los Angeles Innocence Project (LAIP) represents Scott Peterson, who has a petition for writ of habeas
corpus pending in the Court of Appeal. We have been investigating Mr. Peterson's case and discovered there
are a number of items that appear to be missing from the discovery provided to his defense counsel at the
time of trial. In that regard, please find attached a letter setting forth the discovery we are seeking, which we
hope we can address and resolve informally without the need to litigate a Sec. 1054.9 post-
conviction discovery motion in the Superior Court in San Mateo County. We are happy to meet and confer
about the discovery issues, if that would expedite the process for your office.
We are also writing to ask if we could meet and confer regarding the need to have certain items of evidence
DNA tested in this case. If we could reach a stipulation, LAIP is prepared to cover the cost of the testing
through grant funding we obtained, and we could avoid the need to litigate a Sec. 1405 Motion for DNA
Testing in the Superior Court in San Mateo County.
Please let me know if your office is amenable to working together informally to accomplish the above tasks.
Best regards,
Paula M. Mitchell
Paula Mitchell
LOS ANGELES Director
INNOCENCE P (323) 343-4640 I C (310) 403-1477

E [email protected] I W www.lnnocenceLA.org
PROJECT A 1800 Paseo Rancho Castilla, Los Angeles, CA 90032
Confidentiality Notice: This electronic mail transmission is privileged and confidential and is intended
only for the review of the party to whom it is addressed. If you have received this transmission in
error, please immediately notify the sender and follow with its deletion. Unintended transmission shall
not constitute waiver of the attorney-client or any other privilege.
~ 1054 Ltr DA 11.14.23 SLP.pdf

989K

Jeff Laugero <[email protected]> Tue, Nov 14, 2023 at 9:26 PM
To: Paula Mitchell <[email protected]>
Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, Birgit Fladager <[email protected]>, Dave
Harris <[email protected]>, Victoria Vasquez <[email protected]>
Hello Ms. Mitchell,

the Peterson matter. I have cc'd them as well
Birgit Fladager and Dave Harris remain the prosecutors handling
as DDA Victoria Vasquez so that they can address this request with you. They will continue to be
the points of contact for you regarding this case.
Thank you,
Jeff Laugero
Sent via the Samsung Galaxy S23 5G, an AT&T SG smartphone

Get Outlook for Android
From: Paula Mitchell <[email protected]>

Sent: Tuesday, November 14, 2023 11 :45:41 AM
To: Jeff Laugero <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Subject: People v. Scott Peterson - Informal 1054.9 Discovery Letter
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important
(Quoted text hidden]

Paula Mitchell <[email protected]> Wed, Nov 15, 2023 at 11:03 AM
To: Jeff Laugero <[email protected]>
Bee: Paige MeGrail <[email protected]>, Hilary Morman <[email protected]>, Eliza Haney
<[email protected]>
Dear Mr. Laugero,
Thank you for your prompt reply informing me that you have assigned the original trial prosecutors in Mr.
Peterson's case the tasks of searching for the exculpatory evidence we are seeking through our informal
discovery request and responding to our request for DNA testing, as part of our investigation into Mr.
Peterson's claim of innocence.
I am following up because I want to be sure you are aware that it is now universally accepted best practices
for the original trial prosecutors in a case not to be tasked with, or even involved in, investigating and
searching for exculpatory evidence and/or reviewing the integrity of a conviction.
There are many reasons involving original trial prosecutors in a conviction review is problematic and should
be avoided: they are heavily invested in upholding a conviction they played a major role in obtaining, they
have repeatedly sought to affirm the conviction throughout the appellate process further cementing in their
minds that the conviction is sound, and they have often developed personal ties with victims' family
members that can cloud their ability to undertake a clear-eyed review of the evidence, among other reasons.
Further, because we are specifically requesting discovery related to potential claims of prosecutorial
misconduct committed by a trial prosecutor in this case, this request would best be handled by those not
involved in Mr. Peterson's trial, in order to avoid obvious conflicts of interest.
There is ample guidance to this effect explaining that best practices involve removing original trial
prosecutors from conviction review, to best facilitate the truth-seeking process. See, e.g., USDOJ, Bureau of
Justice Assistance, Upholding the Rule ofLaw: Wrongful Conviction Review Program ("Having a trial or
appellate prosecutor who handled the underlying conviction work be part of a post-conviction review is
problematic because the prosecutor has taken multiple stances to affirm the conviction that only serve to
cement the 'correctness' of that conviction in their mind.") Available at: https://bja.ojp.gov/program/
urlpwc/tta#ppucj; Guidelines for Collaboration and Engagement: Prosecutors and Defense Counsel Working
Together in Joint Post-Conviction Investigations, Quattrone Center for the Fair Administration of Justice
University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School, March, 2022, at p. 7 (the original prosecutors should take no
role in the investigation of wrongful conviction cases or the decision of whether to recommend relief).
Available at:
https://www.law.upenn.edu/live/files/12062-guidelines-for-collaboration-and-engagement; Conviction
Review Units: A National Perspective, Quattrone Center for the Fair Administration of Justice University of
Pennsylvania Law School, April 2016, at p. 31 (Most offices require the recusal of the original prosecutor
from panels or committees reviewing wrongful convictions and limit the original prosecutors' role to being
interviewed about the case but not involved in the investigation or decision making process.). Available at:
https://wwvv.law. upenn.edu/live/files/5522-cru-:final.
We recently discussed these best practices with representatives of the California Attorney General's Office in
connection with their newly established Post-Conviction Justice Unit and they also recognized that recusing
original trial prosecutors is an essential component in conducting a fair and independent review of the
integrity of a conviction.
I hope that in light of this well-established principle, you will reconsider your decision to assign this matter
to the original trial prosecutors to investigate and respond to our requests, so we can ensure that j ustice is
done in this complicated and important case.
Best regards,
Paula M. Mitchell
Paula Mitchell
LOS ANGELES Director
INNOCENCE P (323) 343-4640 I c (310) 403-1477

E [email protected] I W www. lnnocenceLA.org
PROJECT A 1800 Paseo Rancho Castilla, Los Angeles, CA 90032
Confidentiality Notice: This electronic mail transmission is privileged and confidential and is intended
only for the review of the party to whom it is addressed. If you have received this transmission in
error, please immediately notify the sender and follow with its deletion. Unintended transmission shall
not constitute waiver of the attorney-client or any other privilege.
[Quoted text hidden)
EXHIBIT C
Court of Appeal, First Appellate District
Char1es D. Johnson, Clerk/Executive Officer
Electronically FILED on 12/1/2023 by C. Ford, Deputy Clerk
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION TWO
In re SCOTT PETERSON, A167615

on Habeas Corpus.
(San Mateo County
Super. Ct. No. SC055500A)
BY THE COURT:
Petitioner's "Motion to Suspend Informal Briefing in Support of
Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus" is granted for six months from the filing
of this order.
Any renewed request will be subject to further showing of necessity.
DATED: December 1, 2023

_ __Stewart,
_ _ __ P.J. __ _, Stewart' p ..
J
1
EXHIBIT D
Office of the District Attorney Assistant District Attorney
Mark Zahner
Stanislaus County
Chief Deputies
Marlisa Ferreira
Wende ll Emerson
Jeff Laugero Michael D. Houston
RickMury
District Attorney Joseph Chavez
Bureau of Investigation
Chief Terry L. Seese
December 14, 2023
Paula Mitchell
Director
1800 Paseo Rancho Castilla
Los Angeles, CA 90032
Ernai I: [email protected]
Re Informal Discovery Request (Pen. Code section I054.9 - People v. Peterson (SC055500A)
Ms. Mitchell,
District Attorney Jeff Laugero has received your request regarding the informal discovery request
related to the matter of the People versus Scott Peterson. He has asked me to respond to you
directly.
In reference to your statement about potential concerns in this Office's assignment of the original
prosecutors, we completely disagree that your cited materials provide any basis for
removal. District Attorney Laugero is completely confident in having the original prosecution
team respond to any and all requests in any subsequent post-conviction matters. You may not be
aware but it was our team that brought newly discovered information to the attention of inmate
Peterson's lawyers and the court during his last habeas matter. Our transparency during the alleged
juror misconduct issue is part of the record and District Attorney Laugero has no intention of
removing our team and our valuable experience from any post-conviction project related to this
matter.
Your 64-page request lists a few items which were purportedly not included in the initial discovery
to defendant Peterson's original trial counsel and several other items. However, you have peppered
this request with accusations for which (as you state in the request) you have chosen to withhold
the basis; this lack of full and complete disclosure calls into question the suggested intent of a
transparent reciprocal discovery process, especially given your implied claim of innocence. The
fact that you have chosen to withhold items you claim to possess that support some of your
assertions is troubling. However, it is our office's intention to respond to your request in due course
Page 2 of2
Re Informal Discovery Request (Pen. Code section I 054.9 - People v. Peterson (SC055500A)
given the grant by the First District Court of Appeal for a six-month extension for your Reply Brief
to the Attorney General's Informal Response. However, as you recognize having dealt with these
matters for many years, there is no informal discovery process provided for under Penal Code
section 1054.9.
As an aside, our office was previously scheduled to meet with defendant Peterson's prior appointed
habeas corpus counsel to discuss their current claims in August of 2023, but that meeting was
cancelled by defendant Peterson's prior appointed counsel on habeas corpus. If you would like to
reschedule that meeting, our team would be pleased to meet and confer with you in the new year.
This office continues to strive to ensure justice for the victims of crime as well as justice for those
accused, charged, prosecuted and convicted.
Thank you,
~0-~~~
Birgit Fladager
Special Prosecutor
2
EXHIBIT 2
EXHIBIT
Declaration of Scott Peterson
1 Declaration of Scott L. Peterson
2 I, Scott L. Peterson, hereby declare under penalty of perjury that the following is true and
3 accurate to the best of my knowledge:
4 l. I am 51 years old and cun-ently incarcerated by the California Department of
5 Con-ections and Rehabilitation at Mule Creek State Prison in Ione, Cal ifornia, serving a sentence
6 of life without the possibility of parole.
7 2. In 2004, I was wrongfully convicted of murdering my wife, Laci Peterson, and our
8 unborn son, Conner. The identity of the perpetrator or perpetrators of the crimes for which I was
9 wrongly convicted has always been a contested issue in this case. I have steadfastly maintained
10 my innocence from the moment my wife went missing on December 24, 2002, throughout my
11 trial, appeal, and post-conviction proceedings, and to this day.
12 3. I had absolutely nothing to do with the disappearance and deaths of my wife and
13 son. I am not a violent person. I have never had a physical fight or violent incident with anyone
14 in my life. I am a law-abiding citizen who had no criminal record prior to my arrest in this case.
15 I have never had any incident or rule violation report since my wrongful incarceration began in
16 2003. I did not harm or kill my family.
17 4. At my request and on my behalf, investigations into who is responsible for the
18 deaths of my wife and son have been ongoing over the last 21 years and continue to this day. In
19 the course of these investigations, I have discovered that critical exculpatory evidence was
20 ignored, overlooked, or never investigated at all, and in other instances was suppressed at the time
21 of my trial.
22 5. Newly discovered evidence that was not presented to the jury at my trial supports
23 my claim of innocence. As part of my ongoing effort to prove my innocence, I submit this
24 declaration setting forth the evidence that supports my claim of innocence, in support of my
25 Motion for DNA Testing of certain items of physical evidence pursuant to Penal Code section
26 1405 and in support of my Motion for Post-Conviction Discovery Pursuant to Penal Code section
21 l 054.9 for production of evidence that has to date not been turned over-evidence I believe will
28 further support my claim of innocence.
DECLARATION OF SCOTT L. PETERSON

1
1 PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
2 6. Laci and I lived in Stanislaus County on December 24, 2002, when she was
3 abducted. Laci was missing for almost four months; the remains of our son, Conner, and my
4 wife's remains were found almost four months later on, April 13 and 14, 2003, respectively, along
s the shoreline of east San Francsico Bay. The police immediately and erroneously targeted me as
6 the prime suspect. I cooperated fully with the police when I discovered Laci was missing but it
7 became clear to me from day one that no matter how much I cooperated, the police believed I was
8 responsible for my wife's disappearance.
9 7. During the search to find Laci, the police continually ignored evidence showing
10 my innocence including eyewitness reports that Laci was alive and walking our dog the day she
11 disappeared. In addition, 11 search warrants were served on me-beginning with the first one
12 executed on December 26, 2002, on our home, vehicles, computers, financial records, phone
13 records, boat, my office, and warehouse- from which hundreds of items of purported "evidence"
14 were collected but no physical or direct evidence implicating me in the killing of my family was
15 ever found.
16 8. I now know that I was also subj ected to constant and relentless 24-hour
17 surveillance by law enforcement while Laci was missing, including thousands of wire-tapped and
18 recorded phone conversations. GPS tracking devices were surreptitiously mounted on my
19 vehicles so police could have me under constant surveillance, a pole camera was mounted outside
20 our home on January 3, 2003, to monitor when I came and went, and police officers waited in
21 unmarked vehicles parked around the comer from our home to follow my every move, even as I
22 left to go distribute " missing person" flyers, or assist at the volunteer center with the search for
23 Laci, or go to look into tips from people who were calling in to report a possible sighting of Laci.
24 Once again, none of the evidence obtained through the extensive surveillance of my movements
25 implicated me in my family's disappearance or deaths. (RT 943-44 [Jacobson: surveillance
26 yielded no evidence showing that I had any knowledge of what happened to Laci].)
27 9. I was interviewed by police for more than 12 hours, in what felt to me like
28 custodial settings. Modesto Police Depa1tment Oct. Al Brocchini repeatedly told me he was

2
1 merely trying to "eliminate me as a suspect," but I was clearly the only suspect the police were
2 seriously looking into. I provided the information in this declaration to the police when they were
3 investigating Laci's disappearance in December 2002 and January 2003. I provided detailed
4 answers to all of the questions the police asked me about my activities and whereabouts on the
5 day Laci was abducted during those interviews.
6 10. Of all 12 hours ofinterviews I had with police, only one hour was actually recorded
7 and preserved on tape. The unrecorded interviews were "summarized" in written police reports
8 that I have reviewed. Those reports contain omissions, misstatements and outright falsehoods. I
9 recall providing much more information to the police, including during many phone calls I made
10 to them conveying tips and leads-information that is not included in any written reports.
11 11. After Laci and Conner's remains were found on April 13 and 14, 2003, I was
12 arrested and charged with killing my fami ly. I pleaded not guilty to the charges. My preliminary
13 hearing took place in Stanislaus County, but the venue of my trial was changed to San Mateo
14 County Superior Court due to the overwhelming and unprecedented nature of the media frenzy
15 surrounding Laci's disappearance.
16 12. My trial took place over six months in 2004, during which the prosecution called
17 over 150 witnesses in the guilt phase of my trial but presented no physical, forensic, or direct
18 evidence linking me to the deaths of my wife and son. I was found guilty by a jury on November
19 12, 2004, and sentenced to death on March 16, 2005. I was sent to serve my sentence on death
20 row at San Quentin State Prison, where I spent the next fifteen years waiting for my direct appeal
21 to be filed and decided by the California Supreme Court.
22 13. On August 24, 2020, the California Supreme Court overturned my death sentence
23 because the trial court improperly dismissed prospective jurors who expressed opposition to the
24 death penalty but nevertheless attested in their questionnaire responses that they would have no
25 difficulty imposing a death sentence if that is what the law required.
26 14. On May 16, 202 1, while preparing for a second penalty phase trial, I asked my
27 attorney to request additional discovery from the prosecution that had not yet been turned over to
28 my defense team and me, including police investigation reports from 2002 and 2003 and any new

3
1 leads or tips in the possession of the prosecution team, among other items. On May 28, 202 1,
2 twelve days after the informal request fo r discovery was sent, I was informed that the prosecution
3 decided not to pursue a retrial of the penalty phase and instead defaulted to sentencing me to life
4 without the possibility of parole. The discovery I requested in 2021 has never been produced by
s the prosecution, to my knowledge. I am again seeking that discovery in the motion I am filing
6 with the court now, along with other items that have never been provided by the prosecution.
7 15. When the Stanislaus County District Attorney's Office decided not to seek the
8 death penalty against me a second time, I was resentenced to serve life in prison without
9 possibility of parole at a hearing held on December 8, 2021.
10 16. On November 24,2015, before my appeal was decided, I filed a Petition for a Writ
11 of Habeas Corpus in the California Supreme Court raising statutory and state and federal
12 constitutional claims of error, including a claim of juror misconduct and several claims that the
13 prosecution presented false and unreliable expert testimony and evidence related to (i) scent dog
14 evidence, (ii) fetal biometry, and (iii) movements of bodies in water, in violation of my state and
1s federal rights to due process and of Penal Code section 1473, among other claims.
16 17. On October 14, 2020, the California Supreme Court issued an Order to Show
17 Cause as to Claim One in a Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus, as to why relief should not be
18 granted on the ground that Juror No. 7 committed prejudicial misconduct by not disclosing her
19 prior involvement with other legal proceedings, including that she sought a restraining order while
20 she was pregnant in 2000 out of fear that physical harm would come to her unborn child. I read
21 in the briefing that Juror No. 7 was separately a victim of a domestic violence crime in 200 I,
22 while she was pregnant with another child.
23 18. The California Supreme Court summarily denied the other claims raised in my
24 petition without a reasoned opinion.
25 19. I attended the evidentiary hearing that was held in San Mateo County Superior
26 Court in August 2022 concerning Juror No. 7's alleged prejudicial misconduct. The Superior
27 Court acknowledged that Juror No. 7 was not truthful on her juror questionnaire but still denied
28 the claim because the judge found that her misconduct was not motivated by any bias against me.

4
1 20. On April 19, 2023, I filed a pro se Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus in the
2 California Court of Appeal for the First District seeking review of the Superior Court's denial of
3 my claim that Juror No. 7 committed prejudicial misconduct, which is currently pending. In my
4 pro se 2023 Petition, I also raised claims that the prosecution presented false evidence against me
5 at trial and I submitted new evidence of a confession made by one of the individuals involved in
6 the burglary of our neighbors' home, who admitted to killing my fami ly.
7 21. In July 2023, I contacted the Los Angeles Innocence Project and asked them to
a investigate the evidence in my case and determine whether a post-conviction discovery motion
9 and motion for DNA testing should be fi led so that further investigation can be conducted into
10 who is responsible for killing my family. I believe this additional information will assist in
11 determining what happened to my family and prove that I am innocent and had nothing to do with
12 these horrible crimes that were committed against my wife and son.
13 I have reviewed this declaration in its entirety, and it is accurate to the best of my
14 knowledge. I declare under penalty of perjury pursuant to the laws of the State of California, that
15 the foregoing is true and correct
16
17
18
19
November 29, 2023 Scott L. Peterson
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

5
EXHIBIT 3
EXHIBIT
2011 1054.9 Pleadings
Pleadings and Order
FI L ED
LAWRENCE A. GIBBS
2
(SBN 98866) II OCT20 AH 9: I 2
P.O. Box 7639 CLERK OF TH:: ~tH"R lOR COURT
Berkeley, California 94707 COUIHY OF 51 M c!S lf. US
3
Tel: (510) 525-6847 oY M,'ui.i lfe/3e,"l&y
4 _ _ _ _ DEPU TY
5 Attorney for Defendant - Petitioner

SCOTT PETERSON
6
8
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
9
IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF STANISLAUS
10
11
12 In re SCOTT PETERSON, ) No. SC55500A

13 ) [Supreme Court No. S132449]
On Habeas Corpus. )
14 ) Hearing Date: TBA
15 ) Hearing Time: TBA
) Dept: 7 [Hon. Scott Steffan]
16
17
18
• NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR POST-CONVICTION
DISCOVERY (PEN. CODE § 1054.9);
19 • MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES ;
20
• DECLARATION OF COUNSEL.
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
People v. Scott Peterson, No. SC55500A

Motion for Post-Conviction Discovery [Pen. Code § 1054.9] SLP404619
I
LAWRENCE A. GIBBS
(SBN 98866)
2
P.O. Box 7639
3 Berkeley, California 94707
Tel: (510) 525-6847
4
5 Attorney for Defendant - Petitioner
SCOTT PETERSON
6
7
8 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
9
IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF STANISLAUS
10
11
12 In re SCOTT PETERSON, ) No. SC55500A

13 ) [Supreme Court No. S132449]
On Habeas Corpus. )
14 ) Hearing Date: TBA
15 ) Hearing Time: TBA
) Dept: 7 [Hon. Scott Steffan]
16
17
18
• NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR POST-CONVICTION
DISCOVERY (PEN. CODE§ 1054.9);
19 • MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES;
20
• DECLARATION OF COUNSEL.
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Motion for Post-Conviction Discovery [Pen. Code § l 054.9] I
SLP404620
I
NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR POST-CONVICTION
DISCOVERY PEN. CODE§ 1054.9)
2
3
Notice is hereby given that on the above-captioned date and time or as soon
4
thereafter as counsel may be heard, in Department 7 of the Stanislaus County Superior
5
Court, the Honorable Scott Steffan, Presiding, Petitioner Scott Peterson, by and through his
6
counsel of record, will move for discovery of the documents, materials, and physical
7
evidence specified below.
8
9
This motion is made pursuant to Penal Code section 1054.9 and is based upon the
10
facts and grounds set forth in this Motion, the accompanying Memorandum of Points and
l1
Authorities, the supporting Declaration of Counsel, the documents on file with the Court in
12
the above-named related case, the Proposed Order for Discovery, as well as any other
13
evidence or testimony the Court may hear.
14
15
By this motion, petitioner requests an order from the Court directing the People to
16
provide the following discovery:
17
18
1. Raw notes and draft reports generated by prosecution expert Roy Oswalt in
19
connection with his analysis of evidence submitted to him by the prosecution
20
and agencies under its control.
21
22
2. Raw notes and draft reports generated by prosecution expert Ralph Cheng in
23
connection with his analysis of of the movement of the bodies of Laci
24
Peterson and Connor Peterson in San Francisco Bay.
25
26
27
28

Motion for Post-Conviction Discovery [Pen. Code § 1054.9] ')
SLP404621
I
3. Raw notes and draft reports generated by prosecution expert Gregory Devore,
2 M.D., in connection with his analysis of evidence submitted to him by the
3 prosecution and agencies under its control.
4
5 4. Raw notes and draft reports generated by prosecution expert Allison
6 Gallaway in connection with her analysis of evidence submitted to her by the
7 prosecution and agencies under its control.
8
9 5. All communications, including notes of oral communications, written
10 communications and emails, between the prosecution and persons under its
11 control, and the following prosecution experts:
12 A. Roy Oswalt.
13 B. Ralph Cheng
14 C. Gregory Devore, M.D.
15 D. Allison Galloway
16 E. Eloise Anderson
17 F. Ron Seitz
18 G. Dog handlers who brought their dogs to the Marina on January 4,
19 2006. (B-21609)
20
21 6. Reports and raw notes of police interviews with the following persons:
22 A. Diana Campos
23 B. Vivian Mitchell
24 C. Bill Mitchell
25 D. Diane Jackson
26 E. Jodi Milagi
27 F. Kathy Smith
28
People v. Scott Peterson, No. SC55S0OA

Motion for Post-Conviction Discovery [Pen. Code § l 054.9] 'l
SLP404622
I
2 Defendant/Petitioner further requests that the prosecution make available to his
3 attorney and his investigators, the following articles of evidence, for inspection and
4 photographing:
5
6 7. The pants and barnacles recovered from Laci Peterson's body after it washed
7 up on shore in San Francisco Bay.
8
9 Defendant has complied with Penal Code section 1954.9, by making an informal
10 request of the district attorney to provide the above-referenced material. The district
11 attorney has denied each and every one of appellant's requests.
12
13 DATED: October I 0, 20 11 Respecfully submitted,

14
15
16 and Petitioner
Scott Peterson
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Motion for Post-Conviction Discovery [Pen. Code § l 054.9] A
SLP404623
I
1 DECLARATION OF LAWRENCE A. GIBBS
2 I, Lawrence A. Gibbs, declare as follows:
3 I have been appointed by the California Supreme Court to represent petitioner Scott
4 Lee Peterson in habeas corpus proceedings in the California Supreme Court challenging his
5 conviction and death sentence.
6
7 2. Prior to making this motion, I have obtained and examined the trial record in Mr.
8 Peterson's case, including the reporter's and clerk's transcripts, the discovery provided to
9 trial counsel by the prosecution, and trial counsel's trial files.
10
11 3. Pursuant to Penal Code section 1054.9, I have requested that the Stanislaus County
12 District Attorney provide Mr. Peterson with discovery of numerous items which appear to
13 exist but I could not locate in the documents described in paragraph 2, above. Pursuant to
14 Penal Code section 1054.9, on July 15, 2011, I sent Deputy District Attorney Dave Harris a
15 request for discovery covering all the items sought by this motion. A true and correct copy
16 of that letter requesting discovery is attached hereto as Exhibit A.
17
18 4. On August 22, 2011, Mr. Harris sent me a letter responding to my request for
19 discovery. A true and correct copy of Mr. Harris' letter is attached hereto as Exhibit B. IN
20 that letter, Mr. Harris refused to provide discovery as to each and every request.
21
22 5. Having unsuccessfully attempted to obtain the requested discovery by informal

23 means, petitioner has no recourse but to file this motion for discovery to compel the
24 prosecution to comply with its obligations under section 1054.9.
25 I declare under penalty of perjury, under the laws of the United States and the State of
California, that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on October 17 2011.
26
27
28

<
Motion for Post-Conviction Discovery [Pen. Code § 1054.9) SLP404624
I
LAWR.ENCE A. G IBBS
ATTORNEY
July 15, 2011
Mr. David Hanis

Deputy District Attorney, Stanislaus County
832 12th St., # 300
Modesto, CA 95354-2327
Re: People v. Scott Peterson, No.

Cal. Supreme Court No. S132449
Dear Dave,
As you know, I have been appointed by the California Supreme Court to represent
Scott Peterson in habeas corpus proceedings following the judgment of death in the
above-referenced case. Pursuant to Penal Code section 1054.9, I am requesting that your
office provide me with discovery of the items listed below.
I have obtained from Mark Geragos all of his trial files in the case, and after a
thorough search, have not located the below items in those files. Mr. Geragos has
informed me that he does not have copies of any of the below items.
For each item, I have set forth my reason for believing that such discovery exists,
and why Mr. Peterson is entitled to that discovery.
1. Raw notes and draft reports generated by the following prosecution

experts in connection with their analyses of evidence submitted to
them by the prosecution and agencies under its control:
A. Gregory Devore, M.D.

B. Allison Galloway
Reason for believing above items exist: These experts produced reports
and testified at trial. (See Discovery atp. 38,403-38,406 [Devore Report];
Discovery at pp. 17,336-17,338 [Galloway Report]. It is customary for
experts to produce their final report based on notes recorded during their
examination of the evidence.
P.O. BOX 7639, BERKELEY, CA 94707 TEL: 510.525-6847 FAX: 510.528-0228
SLP404625
LAWR.ENCE A. GIBBS
ATTORNEY
Petitioner's right to obtain the above items: Penal Code§ 1054.l(f)

[providing for pretrial discovery of all "[r]elevant written or recorded
statements ofwitnesses or reports ofthe statements ofwitnesses whom the
prosecution intends to call at the trial, including any reports or statements
of experts made in connection with the case including the results of
physical or mental examinations, scientific tests, experiments, or
comparisons which the prosecution intends to offer in evidence at the
trial."]
2. Raw notes and draft reports generated by prosecution expert Ralph

Cheng in connection with his analysis of of the movement of the bodies
of Laci Peterson and Connor Peterson in San Francisco Bay.
Reason for believing above items exist: Dr. Cheng produced an email
report and a Powerpoint used at trial. Both documents were apparently
based on calculations that were not included. It is customary for experts
to retain rough notes of their calculations leading to a final report.
Petitioner's right to obtain the above items: Penal Code § 1054.1 (f)
[providing for pretrial discovery of all "[r]elevant written or recorded
statements ofwitnesses or reports ofthe statements ofwitnesses whom the
trial."]
3. Raw notes, draft reports and final reports generated by any dog
handlers, including but not limited to Eloise Anderson and Ron Seitz,
regarding their efforts to detect the scent of Laci Peterson at the
Berkeley Marina.
Reason for believing above items exist: The record indicates that Seitz
filed a report with CARDA regarding his activities at the Marina. (RT
19613.) Petitioner does not have a copy ofthat report. Nor does petitioner
have any notes or prior drafts written by Seitz. Petitioner also does not
have any report made by Anderson. CARDA requires dog~handlers to file
SLP404626
LAWR.ENCE A. GIBBS
ATTORNEY
rep;orts. (9 RT 1777.) Based on Seitz filing of a CARDA report, it

appears that Anderson would also have filed such a report with CARDA.
Petitioner's right to obtain the above items: Penal Code § 1054.l(f)

[providing for pretrial discovery of all "[r]elevamt written or recorded
statements of witnesses or reports ofthe statements of witnesses whom the
trial."]
4. All communications, including notes of oral communications, written

communications and emails, between the prosecution and persons
under its control, and the following prosecution experts:
A. Roy Oswalt
B. Ralph Cheng1
C. Gregory Devore, M.D.2
D. Allison Galloway3
E. Eloise Anderson
F. Ron Seitz
G. Dog handlers other than Eloise Anderson and Ron Seitz who
brought their dogs to the Berkeley Marina in December, 2002
or January, 2003, in an effort to detect Laci Peterson's scent.
(See Discovery at p. 21609)
H. Any computer expert employed by the prosecution for the
analysis of computers owned or used by Scott or Laci Peterson.
I. Any marine biologist consulted in reference to the presence of
barnacles on the remains of Laci Peterson. (See Discovery at p.
21841.)
1 Petitioner has Dr. Cheng's email report appearing at Discovery, pp. 24,210-
24,212.
2 Petitioner has Dr. Devore's report appearing at Discovery, pp. 38,403-38,406.
3 Petitioner has Dr: Galloway's repo1i, appearing at Discovery, pp. 17,336-17,338/
SLP404627
LAWR.ENCE A. GIBBS
ATTORNEY
Reason for believing above items exist: The above experts - Oswalt,
Cheng, Devore, Galloway, Anderson and Seitz - had significant contacts
with the prosecution and agencies under its control, regarding their work
on the case. The only written communications contained in the discovery
are the final reports.
Petitioner's right to obtain the above items: See Penal Code§ 1054.l(f)
5. All notes and reports generated by the Coast Guard, at the request of
BMCS Paul Andrieu, regarding the movement of the bodies of Laci
and Connor Peterson in San Francisco Bay.
Reason for believing above items exist: The discovery indicates that Mr.
Andrieu was consulted by Modesto Police Detectives on May 6, 2003, and
that Andreiu "offered their computer program called 'Jaws' to assist in
seeing if Dr. Cheng's ideas were correct." Discovery, p. 31,248. Mr.
Andieu ran various data in the computer program and produced a map
appearing at Discovery, p. 31,252. No notes or data used to generate the
map are included.
Petitioner's right to obtain the above items: -Penal Code section 1054.1 (c);
In re Steele (2004) 32 Cal.4th 682, 695-696.
6. Notes, charts, videos and reports regarding the polygraph

examinations given to Steven Todd and Glenn Pearce.
Reason for believing above items exist: The discovery, p. 4161-4164

contains reports of the polygraph examinations given to both Todd and
Pearce on January 3, 2003. The examinations were videotaped.
Discovery, p. 24,253.
Petitioner's right to obtain the above items: Penal Code section 1054. l(c);
In re Steele (2004) 32 Cal.4th 682, 695-696 ..
7. Notes of, or correspondence with, any marine biologist or expert in

barnacles consulted by or hired by the prosecution or agencies under
SLP404628
LAWR.ENCE A. G IBBS
ATTORNEY
its control, to evaluate the barnacles found on the remains and

clothing of Laci Peterson.
Reason for believing above items exist: The discovery, p. 21 ,841 states
that experts consulted by the prosecution recommended that an expert in
Marine Biology be retained to examine the barnacles on the remains of
Laci Peterson to determine the length of time the body was in the water.
There are no reports in the discovery regarding such consultation.
Petitioner's right to obtain the above items: Penal Code section 1054. l(c);
In re Steele (2004) 32 Cal.4th 682, 695~696 ..
8. Defendant/Petitioner further requests that the prosecution make

available to his attorney and his investigators, the following articles of
evidence, for inspection and photographing:
The pants and barnacles recovered from Laci Peterson's body after it
washed ashore in San Francisco Bay.
Reason for believing above items exist: See 90 RT 17066 [testimony of

criminalist Pin Kyo regarding her examination of pants containing
barnacles].
Petitioner's right to obtain the above items; Petitioner is entitled to access

to physical evidence upon a showing of good cause to believe that access
to physical evidence is reasonably necessary to the defendant's efforts to
obtain relief. (Penal Code§ 1054.9, subd. (c).) The prosecution's own
experts recommended that a marine biologist examine the barnacles to
determine the amount of time the body was in the water. The timing is
obviously important to the prosecution's theory that the body was placed
in the water on December 24, 2002. Contrary evidence would undermine
the prosecution's theory and be exculpatory.
Thank you for your cooperation.
Very truly yours,
Isl
Lawrence A. Gibbs
SLP404629
OFFlCE OF THE Birgit Fladagcr
District AUorncy
DISTIUCT ATTORNl~Y Carol Shipley
Assistant Dis1rict Attorney
Stanislaus County Chief Deputy -District Atlorncvs
Jerry Begen
832 12'" Strnet, Suite 300 Alan Cassidy
Modesto, CA 95354 Dave Harris
Mailing: P. 0 . Box 442, i\t!odl';slo, CA 95353
Phone: (209) 525-5.~50 Fax: (209) 525°6660
August 22, 2011
Lawrence A. Gibbs
Attorney
P.O. Box 7639
Berkeley, CA 94707
Re: Scott Peters011
Dear Jvlr. Gibbs:
Before I address your specific requests, I want to make a few comments

about the discovery in this trial. Judge Delucchi be11t over backwards to ensure
that the defense got all of the discovery they wanted, not just what they were
entitled to. Throughout the transcripts you wiU see the judge's comments
regarding discovery and the numerous accommodations he made for the defense.
The defense was given the opportunity to go through ,.vitnesses files to make sure
all documents were accounted for. The-re is no known discovery that we ·have not
already provi cled to the defense.
1. Raw notes and draft r~ports generated by the following prosecution

experts in connection with their analyses of evidence submitted to
them by the prnsecution and ~,gcncies under Hs control:
A. Gregory Devore, M.I).
B. Allison Galloway
Response - there are none or were already provided. Both witnesses testified, not
only to their opinions, but as I recall, to the mode of gathering the information.
Both witnesses were cross-examined on these pbints.
2. Raw notes and draft reports generated by prosecution expert Ra lph
SLP404630
Cheng in connection with his analysis of of the movement of the bodies
of L~1ci Peterson and Connor (sic) Peterson in Sau {i'rancisco Bay.
Response - there are none or were already provid~d. Dr. Cheng's raw notes were
included as part of the police reports written by Dr. Owen.
3. Raw notes, draft reports and fin~ll reports gcnci-ated b}; any dog
handlers, including b\lt not Iirnit~d to Efois_c Anderson and Ron Seitz,
regarding their efforts to detect thc·s ccnt of'LaciPeterson at the
Berkeley Marina.
Response - there are none ot were alreac.ly provided. I know that all of Eloise
Anders(m's documents were provided a}id/01· snbjJoenaed by the defense. Ron
Seitz was a defens·e w itness and we have no obligatinn With i'egards to .hGn .
4. All communications, including notes of oral-communications, written

communications and email~, between the prosecution nnd persons
under its control, and th e foll owing pl'osecntion experts:
A. R oy lsic) Oswalt
B. Ralph t'hcng1
C. G regory Devore, M.D.i
D. Allison GallowayJ
E. E loise A11dcrson
F. Ron Sdtz
G. Dog handlers otlter tlta11 Eloise A11d(!rso11 aiUl Rou Seitz who
brought thcfr d_ogs to Hie Bcrkcl¢y M~riua 'in iJcccmbcr, 2002
or Janu:1ty, 20(}3, in an cit'ort to dctcct L iici l~cte1'soh 's scent.
(Sec Discovery at p. 21609)
H. Any computer expert cm1Hoycd by the prosccutfon for the
analysis of computers owncci 01· used l?Y ScuH ot· Lad Peterson.
I. Any marine biofogist c_onsultccl in rcfcr.cn~.e to the prcsc1icc of
barnnclcs oi1 the remains of Lad Pctcrson.-(Scc ])!sco,•cry at p.
21841.)
Response - there are none or were already provided. Whatever \:Ve had was turned
over to the defense.
A. Rod Oswalt - A DOJ crimi:11afrst i:5rovicled all of his notes,
B. Cheng - See #2 above.
C. Devure - See # 1 above.
D. Galloway -- See #1 above.
E. Anderson - See #3 above.
F. Seitz - See #3 above and was not a prosecution witness.
S LP404631
Ci. AII of this infrmnation was documented in Contra Costa Search and
!Zt•:;n1e reporls.
H. Computer Expert - the reports or the two computer experts \-Vere
pn )\' i dccl.
l. Biologist - there was noll'e.
S. ,\II notes mid reports generated by the Col1sl Guarcl, at (he r eques t of
H:VH ·s l'nnl Andricu, r cgar'diug t he movement of the b oclic•s of Laci
a11d Co 11 1101· (sic) P<:itct !i<i i1 in Sim ii1'andsco
. Uay.
.
HL·spt)nse - already provided. You have the map.
6. !'\ores, charts, videos and reports n ~garc)ing th e polygraph

("ia111i 11al'io11~ given H> Steven TiHld i1ild Glcnii l'carcc.
Respnnse - there arc none or ,vere already provided. There were several reports
relnli ng to these individuals and the~1• were provided to the defense. The defense
u:--:L·d \hcse reports with sevcn1l different witnesses.
7. !\nil's of, or co1Tcspondcncc ,vith, nlly marine biologist or expert in

harnadcs co11sn ltccl by or bil'cd by th~ prosecution or agen cies under
its t·1111tn1l, to eva lu ate the barnadcs fo1(ttd on (lie remains au<l
tlol'hing- of La ci Pdcrso n.
Hcspnnse - there is none. \.Vhe11 the bodies were frrst tecovered with barnacles, it
,,·;1!~ lhoughl lhal it might be possible to ''age" or tel I. bow <'.>id a lnirnacle was. A
l Jnivcrsify Professor was ask:ed d'·t:his could be done and he said no . No further
taken.
r-1clio11 ,vas
8. ncr~11dant/Pctitioncr further re.qu ests that lhc 1woscci1tfo n .11rnkc

:iniil:ilJlc to his nttorncy and his im1 cstig:itOl's, th e followingartfolcs of
i;vitll'llct\ for inspection m1(l photog1·:1pli111g:
T IH' pants and lrnrnacks rccovcrccl frOiiJ Lael Pcler sori's bod)' after it
wa,lll'd nsliorc in San Fr:\i1dsco Bay.
l{csponse - The People \.Viii object. l.n 2003, the defense was allowed a second
:1ulo psy of lhc victims in lhis case, conducted by Dr. Cyril \Vecht and Henry Lee.
SLP404632
During the defense autopsy, extensive photographs, measureme1its, microscopic
evaluations and samples were taken froni each victim. All items of physical
evidence were examiJ1ed or made available for examination. Any examination of
biological material, such as decomposed flesh and/or barnacles, conducted eight
(8) years after the discovery of the bodies would not be relevant to any habeas
claim.
Very Trnly Yours,
Birrs.it Fladager
DlSTIUCT ATTORNEY
David P. Hatpis
Chief Deputy District Attorney
SLP404633
l MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES
2
Introduction
3
California Penal Code section 1054.9 ("section 1054.9") governs post-conviction
4
discovery in capital cases. The statute entitles petitioners to receive discovery in order to
5
ensure the full development and timely presentation of all potentially meritorious claims for
6
habeas corpus relief. As interpreted by the California Supreme Court in In re Steele (2004)
7
32 Cal. 4th 682, section 1054.9 requires the prosecution and law enforcement agencies
8
involved in the case to disclose all discovery to which defendant would have been entitled
9
at the time of trial. (Id. at pp. 694-698.) The parties have conferred in an attempt to
10
resolve the matter informally. While there are areas of agreement, the District Attorney's
11
office has declined to provide Petitioner with all discovery he would have been entitled at
12
time of trial. Thus, court intervention is requested to ensure efficient and expeditious
13
compliance with the capital post-conviction discovery statute.
14
15
16
Procedural History
17
Petitioner was convicted at trial of capital murder and sentenced to death in this
18
court. On February 18, 2010, the California Supreme Court appointed the undersigned
19
counsel to represent Petitioner in his habeas corpus and executive clemency proceedings.
20
Pursuant to Supreme Court rules, to be considered timely, the petition must be filed within
21
three years of the date of appointment, or 180 days after the filing of the reply brief on
22
direct appeal, whichever is later. (Supreme Court Policies Regarding Cases Arising From
23
Judgments of Death, Policy 1-1.1.)
24
Upon appointment, petitioner's habeas counsel received a dopy of the trial record
25
consisting of over 40,000 pages; the discovery provided by the prosecution at trial,
26
consisting of over 42,000 pages; and trial counsel's file contained in over 100 banker's
27
boxes.
28

r
I
1 Following a review of this material, habeas counsel made the first set of requests, 1
2 described below, for post-conviction discovery. The prosecution refused each and every
3 request. This motion follows.
4
5 Post-Convi~tion Discovery Proceedings

6 I. Petitioner's Discovery Requests
7 Pursuant to Penal Code section 1054.9, on July 15, 2011, petitioner sent Deputy
8 District Attorney Dave Harris a request for discovery covering all the items sought by this
9 motion. A true and correct copy of that letter requesting discovery is attached hereto as
10 Exhibit A.
11
12 II. The Prosecution's Responses
13 On August 22, 2011, Mr. Harris sent petitioner's counsel a letter responding to
14 petitioner's request for discovery. (See Exhibit B.) Mr. Harris refused to provide
15 discovery as to each and every request. His stated reasons are set forth below:
16
17
18
19
20
21
1
22
Petitioner's counsel has advised the court and the district attorney that, in view of the
voluminous nature of the material in this case, exceeding 150,000 pages, petitioner has chosen
23 to move for discovery in stages, rather than waiting until all the material has been reviewed
24 and submitting a single, global request. Petitioner has explained that, in view of the Supreme
Court's presumptive timeliness deadlines for filing the petition, there may be insufficient time
25 to make a single global motion, which may then require time-consuming appellate review. In
order to meet the timeliness deadline for filing his petition, petitioner has chosen to bring a
26
discove1y motion promptly upon determining that he does not have a batch of material. This
27 court has indicated that it recognizes, and will attempt to accommodate, petitioner's
timeliness concerns.
28

Motion for Post-Conviction Discovery [Pen. Code § 1054.9]
,.,
SLP404635
I
1
2 Discovery Request Response

3 1 Notes and draft reports of 1. There are none.
•Gregory Devore
4 •Allison Galloway 2. They were already provided.
•Ralph Cheng
5 3. They testified as witnesses
6 Notes and draft reports of 1. There are none.
2 dog handlers, including
7 Eloise Anderson 2. They were already provided
8 3. They were subpoenaed by the defense.
9 3 Notes and draft r?orts of 1. Seitz was a defense witness and the ~rosecution
dog handler Ron eitz "has no obligation with regards to him. '
10
All communications 1. There are none.
11 4 between the prosecution
and: 2. They were already provided
12 •Roh Oswalt
•Ra ph Cheng 3. Seitz was not a prosecution witness
13 •Gregory Devore
•Allison Galloway
14 •Eloise Anderson
•Ron Seitz
15 •Other Dog Handlers
•Any computer expert
16 Notes and reports generated 1. Already provided. The defense "has the map."
5 by Coast Guard re
17 movement of the bodies in
18
the bay.
Notes and charts of 1. There are none.
19 6 olylaph exam of Steven
20
lF
od and Glen Pearce 2. They were already provided
Notes and correspondence 1. There are none.
21 7 with marine biology expert
re barnacles on the bodies of 2. A "University Professor" was consulted and stated
22 the victims. that it was not possible to tell how old a barnacle was,
and no further action was taken.
23
Permit inspection of 1. Object. Items were made available to the defense
24 clothing and other items prior to trial.
8 with barnacles.
25 2. "Any examination of biological material, such as
decomposed flesh and/or barnacles, conducted eitht
26 years after the discovery of the bodies would not e
relevant to any habeas claim.
27
For the reasons explained below, petitioner is entitled to the requested discovery.
28

Motion for Post-Conviction Discovery [Pen. Code § I 054.9] 0
SLP404636
I
1 ARGUMENT
2 I. The Legal Landscape of Post-Conviction Discovery
3 A. The Governing Statute: Penal Code§ 1054.7
4 Because this motion is governed by Penal Code section 1054.9, petitioner
5 sets out the full text of that statute for the convenience of the Court and the parties:
6 (a) Upon the prosecution of a post-conviction writ of habeas corpus or
7 a motion to vacate a judgment in a case in which a sentence of death
or of life in prison without the possibility of parole has been imposed,
8 and on a showing that good faith efforts to obtain discovery materials
9 from trial counsel were made and were unsuccessful, the court shall,
except as provided in subdivision (c), order that the defendant be
10 provided reasonable access to any of the materials described in
subdivision (b).
11
12 (b) For purposes of this section, "discovery materials" means materials

in the possession of the prosecution and law enforcement authorities to which
13
the same defendant would have been entitled at time of trial.
14
(c) In response to a writ or motion satisfying the conditions in subdivision (a),
15
court may order that the defendant be provided access to physical evidence
16 for the purpose of examination, including, but not limited to, any physical
evidence relating to the investigation, arrest, and prosecution of the defendant
17
only upon a showing that there is good cause to believe that access to
18 physical evidence is reasonably necessary to the defendant's effort to obtain
relief. The procedures for obtaining access to physical evidence for purposes
19
of post-conviction DNA testing are provided in Section 1405, and nothing in
20 this section shall provide an alternative means of access to physical evidence
for those purposes.
21
(d) The actual costs of examination or copying pursuant to this section shall be
22 borne or reimbursed by the defendant.
23
24 B. The Timing and Forum For Post-Conviction Discovery

25 In Steele, the California Supreme Court provided guidance to capital habeas
26 Petitioners as to the appropriate scope, forum, and timing of discovery motions under
27 section 1054.9. The Court found that "the statute permits discovery as an aid in preparing
28

Motion for Post-Conviction Discovery [Pen. Code § 1054.9] "
SLP404637
I
the petition, which means discovery may come before the petition is filed." (Steele, supra,
2 32 Cal. 4th at p. 691.) The trial court that rendered the judgment is the proper forum for
3 discovery requests under section 1054.9 absent exigent circumstances. (Id. at p. 692.) Also
4 in Steele, the Court expressed its expectation that the parties would attempt to resolve
5 discovery informally "prior to seeking court enforcement." (Id.)
6 As described more fully below, Petitioner's counsel submitted written requests to
7 the District Attorney requesting the discovery materials detailed in this motion. (See Exh.
8 A hereto, Declaration of Lawrence A. Gibbs, Exhibit A.) The prosecution ultimately
9 rebuffed Petitioner's requests in their entirety. (Id., Exhibit B.)
10 Accordingly, this motion is properly brought before this Court at this time.
11
12 C. Penal Code Section 1054.9 Entitles A Petitioner to Discovery of All

Information He Was Provided At Trial And Which Has Become
13 Lost, And All Information To Which He Would Have Been
Entitled At Trial But Was Not Given.
14
15 Section I 054.9 provides that whenever a death-sentenced defendant seeks habeas

16 corpus relief and makes a showing that good faith efforts to obtain discovery from trial
17 counsel were unsuccessful, the court shall order the prosecution to provide defendant with
18 all "materials in the possession of the prosecution and law enforcement authorities to which
19 the same defendant would have been entitled at time of trial." (Steele, 32 Cal. 4th at 697.)
20 More specifically, as construed by the California Supreme Court, section 1054.9 requires
21 the trial court to order discovery of:
22 ( 1) materials that the prosecution did provide at time of trial but have since
23 become lost to the defendant;
24 (2) materials the prosecution should have provided at time of trial because they
came within the scope of a discovery order the trial court actually issued at
25 that time, a statutory duty to provide discovery, or the constitutional duty to
26 disclose exculpatory evidence;
27
28

Motion for Post-Conviction Discovery [Pen. Code § 1054.9] 1"
SLP404638
I
1 (3) materials that the prosecution should have provided at time of trial because
the defense specifically requested them at that time and was entitled to
2 receive them; and
3
(4) materials that the prosecution had no obligation to provide at time of trial
4 absent a specific defense request, but to which the defendant would have
been entitled at time of trial had the defendant specifically requested them.
5
6 (Steele, 32 Cal. 4th at 697.)

7
8 In discussing the foregoing categories, Steele makes two points that are particularly
9 relevant to the instant motion. First, the state's duty to disclose discovery materials in its
10 possession is not limited to those documents and materials that physically are within the
11 actual possession of the District Attorney's office. The statute requires discovery of any
12 relevant materials "in the possession of the prosecution and law enforcement authorities," a
13 duty extending to any and all law enforcement authorities who were "involved in the
14 investigation or prosecution" of Petitioner's case. (Id.) This includes all law enforcement
15 agencies, medical entities, and any other actor or entity involved in Petitioner's arrest and
16 detention, the investigation and prosecution of Petitioner's case, and his sentencing. (Id.
17 at 696-97 ["'The scope of this disclosure obligation extends beyond the contents of the
18 prosecutor's case file and encompasses the duty to ascertain as well as divulge 'any
19 favorable evidence known to the others acting on the government's behalf .. .. "']; see also
20 Steele, 32 Cal. 4th at p. 698 ["evidence favorable to the defendant in a capital case can
21 extend beyond evidence relating to the prosecution evidence or theory of the case.].)
22 Second, the prosecution's is obligated to provide post-conviction discovery even if it
23 provided that discovery to trial counsel, if that discovery has "since become lost to the
24 defendant." (Steele, 32 Cal.4th at p. 697.) The Supreme Court explained that the statute
25
"permits record reconstruction; thus, the defendant is entitled to materials the prosecution
26
provided at trial but that the defendant can show have since been lost. We believe it also
27
28

1 1
t
1 includes materials to which the defendant was actually entitled at time of trial, but did not
2 receive." (Steele, 32 Cal.4th at p. 682.)
3 As demonstrated below, Petitioner's specific and detailed requests squarely fall
4 within the categories of discovery materials delineated in Steele to which Petitioner is
5 entitled.
6
D. Penal Code Section 1054.9 Also Entitles A Petitioner, Upon a
7 Showing of Good Cause, to Access to All Physical Evidence
Pertaining to His Case
8
9 Pursuant to subsection (c) of section 1054.9, when a death-sentenced defendant

10 makes "a showing that there is good cause to believe that access to physical evidence is
11 reasonably necessary to the defendant's effort to obtain relief' in pending habeas corpus
12 proceedings, the court is empowered to order that the "defendant be provided access to
13 physical evidence for the purpose of examination, including, but not limited to, any
14 physical evidence relating to the investigation, arrest, and prosecution of the defendant."
15 Id. The explicit terms of section 1054 .9(c) thus make clear that access is not limited to the
16 physical evidence actually introduced as exhibits at trial, but encompasses "any physical
17 evidence" that is "reasonably necessary" to the development of potentially meritorious
18 claims for habeas corpus relief. (Id. [emphasis added].)
19
20 II. Pursuant to Penal Code § 1054.9, Petitioner Scott Peterson Is Entitled To
21 The Discovery He Has Requested From the District Attorney, And
Which The District Attorney Has Refused To Provide.
22
A. Counsel Has Made Good Faith but Unsuccessful Efforts to Obtain
23 the Requested Material from Trial Counsel Petitioner's Motion for
Post-conviction Discovery (Pen. Code § 1054.9)
24
Section 1054.9 affords death-sentenced defendants an absolute right to an order for
25
discovery of materials covered by its provisions upon a showing that good faith efforts to
26
obtain the materials from trial counsel were unsuccessful. See Cal. Penal Code § 1054.9(a)
27
(the trial court "shall" order access upon the requisite showing). The Declaration of
28

1,..,
Motion for Post-Conviction Discovery [Pen. Code § I 054.9) SLP404640
I
1 Lawrence A. Gibbs, attached hereto as Exhibit A, establishes the "good faith effort"
2 entitling Petitioner to discovery of the materials requested herein under section 1054.9(b).
3 Petitioner's habeas counsel has attempted diligently, without success, to
4 obtain all materials that the defense actually possessed as well as those that defense counsel
5 would have been entitled to receive in the course of preparing for trial. These efforts
6 include requests of trial and appellate counsel after a thorough review of the transcript, the
7 discovery and the trial exhibits. Further, on July 15, 2011, habeas counsel sent an informal
8 discovery request to the District Attorney. That request provided the prosecutor with a
9 detailed list of the items sought. Exhibit A, at 2. The prosecution refused to provide any of
10 this discovery. Accordingly, Petitioner has satisfied the statutory requirement of seeking
11 informal discovery before filing a motion to compel such discovery.
12
13 B. The Prosecutor's Objections To Providing The Discovery

of the Requested Documents Are Baseless And Should Be
14 Overruled.
15 The first seven categories of discovery requests, set out in the chart on page 7,
16 above, seek documents generated by the prosecution or its agents in the course of the the
17 investigation of the case against petitioner. With respect to categories 1, 2, 4 and 6, the
18 prosecution stated that there are no such documents or they were already provided.
19 As the Supreme Court made crystal clear in Steele, the fact that a document might
20 have been provided at trial is no grounds for objection whatsoever to a discovery request
21 under section 1054.9. The court could not have been clearer: post-conviction discovery is
22 required for materials that the prosecution did provide at time of trial but have since
23 become lost to the defendant. (Steele, 32 Cal. 4th at 697.) It is therefore groundless for the
24 prosecution to refuse to make post-conviction discovery by arguing that they previously
25 provided the requested material. Petitioner states that he does not have this material. The
26 prosecution should be ordered to provide the material, if it exists. The objection that the
27 material was already provided should therefore be overruled.
28

1 ..,
'
l If, however, the material does not exist, the prosecution has no obligation to provide
2 it. Because the prosecution responded to the requests by stating, in the alternative, that the
3 material does not exist or was previously provided, petitioner cannot tell whether the
4 material exists or not. The prosecution should therefore be ordered to determine whether
5 the requested material exists. If the material exists, the prosecution should be ordered to
6 provide it. If it does not exist, the prosecution should state that fact on the record.
7 For the similar reasons, the prosecution's objections that the witnesses associated
8 with the documents testified at trial (Category 1), or were subpoenaed by the defense
9 (Category 2) are equally baseless. Whether a prosecution witness testified at trial does not
10 deprive a petitioner under section 1054.9 from obtaining documents the prosecution was
11 required to provide at trial but which are now lost to the defendant. Again, the defendant
12 requests "record reconstruction," and the statute specifically requires such discovery.
13 Similarly, the prosecution's objection to the discovery of documents associated with
14 dog handler Ron Seitz, that he was not a prosecution witness, should be overruled. The
15 Supreme Court explained in Steele that the defense is entitled to materials the prosecution
16 should have provided at time of trial because they came within the scope of a discovery
17 order the trial court actually issued at that time, a statutory duty to provide discovery, or the
18 constitutional duty to disclose exculpatory evidence. (Steele, 32 Cal. 4th at 697 .) The
19 police in this case brought Ron Seitz and his trailing dog to the Berkeley Marina the same
20 day that Eloise Anderson brought her trailing dog to the Marina. As part of the police
21 investigation, both dogs worked the same territory. Anderson testified that her dog,
22 Trimble, detected Laci Peterson's scent at the Marina. Her testimony was so inculpatory
23 that the prosecutor told the jury that if they believed Anderson and Trimble, and "If Laci
24 Peterson's scent is at the Berkeley Marina, then he's guilty. I mean that's as simple as that."
25 (111 RT 20534.) But Seitz's dog detected no such scent. (9 RT 1777-1778.)
26 Seitz's contrary evidence was therefore exculpatory. As such, the prosecution is
27 obligated to turn over to the defense such exculpatory evidence under its constitutional duty
28

I A
I
t to disclose exculpatory evidence. (Steele, 32 Cal. 4th at 697.) This obligation does not
2 depend on whether Seitz was a prosecution witness, or a defense witness, but instead on
3 whether the evidence is favorable to the defense. (Strickler v. Greene ( 1999) 527 U.S. 263,
4 280; Brady v. Maryland (1963) 373 U.S. 83, 87.) The prosecution should therefore be
5 compelled to provide the notes and reports that led to Seitz's exculpatory testimony.
6 Finally, the prosecution's objection to permitting inspection of the barnacles on the
7 clothing recovered from Laci Peterson's body should be overruled. Again, the objection
8 that the material was previously made available to the defense is of no relevance under
9 section 1054.9. Further, the prosecutor's personal, untrained and non-expert opinion that
10 examination of the barnacles is not relevant to any habeas claim is totally baseless. The
11 prosecutions' s own forensic expert, Allison Galloway, suggested that the prosecution
12 consult a marine biologist to examine the barnacles to determine the length of time the
13 bodies were in the water. (Discovery, at p. 21841.) The district attorney now expresses a
14 different opinion. But his current opinion on scientific matters on which he has absolutely
15 no expertise, surely cannot restrict a defendant's access to discovery in a capital case.
16 Petitioner is of course entitled to retain his own expert to examine the barnacles. If that
17 expert were to determine that the barnacles were far older, or younger, than they would be if
18 they attached to a body placed in the water on December 24, 2002, then such opinion would
19 be relevant to a habeas corpus claim. Petitioner should therefore be permitted to inspect
20 and photograph the clothing and barnacles.
21
22 Conclusion
23 The court should order the prosecution to provide the requested discovery.
24 Dated: October 14, 2011 Respectfully submi~u
25
26 nceA. Gibbs
ey for Petitio er
27
28

1 ,:
I
PROOF OF SERVICE.
2
Case: People v. Scott Peterson
3
I declare that I am employed in the County of Alameda. I am over the age of
4 eighteen years and not a party to this cause. My business address is P.O. Box 7639,
5 Berkeley, California. Today, I served the foregoing NOTICE OF MOTION AND
MOTION FOR POST-CONVICTION, DISCOVERY (PEN. CODE§ 1054.9);
6 MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES; DECLARATION OF COUNSEL.
7 his cause by placing a true copy thereof enclosed in a sealed envelope with postage fully
prepaid, in the United States mail at Berkeley, CA, addressed as follows:
8
9 David Harris
Deputy District Attorney, Stanislaus County
10 832 12th St., # 300
11 Modesto, CA 95354-2327 Glen Pruden
Office of Attorney General
12 455 Golden Gate Ave. , #11000 i
San Francisco, CA 94102
13
14 I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct, and that this
15 declaration was executed on October 14, 2011, in ' rkeley, (11i.fornia:
16
La ence A. Gibbs
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

1 r.
I
1
1 BIRGIT FLADAGER
District · Attorney
2 Stanislaus County
832 12th Street , Suite 300
3 Modesto, California
Telephone : 525-5550
4
Attorney for Plaintiff
5
7
STANISLAUS COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT
8
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
9
------------ ---000------- - ------ -
D. A . No . 1056770
11 THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) No . 1056770
) (San Mateo County
12 ___________ ?1~3:ntiff L ____ _j ___S_QJ?erior Court ___ _____________
) #SC55500A)
13 )
) OBJECTION TO
14 ) DEFENDANT ' S
) REQUEST FOR
15 ) POST-CONVICTION
) DISCOVERY
1611 vs . )
)
1 7 ' SCOTJ; LEE PETE)~SON , ) Dept : 7
) Hrg : 11/18/2011
18 Defendant/Appellant . ) Time: 8 : 30a . m.
19 ~ ---- - ----------000 . ------ --------
20 Com~s now the People of t h e State of California , to OBJECT to
21 De f".'"cndant/Appellant' s REQUEST FOR POST-CONVICTION DISCOVERY under
22 ~enal Code §1054 . 9 , seeking numerous items of discovery .
24 Penal Code §1054 . 9 says :
25 (a) Upon the prosecution of a postconviction wri t of h abeas

corpus or a mot i on to vacate a judgment in a case in which a
26 sentence of death or of l ife in prison without the possibility
of parole has been i mposed , and on a showing that good faith
27 efforts to obtain discovery materials from trial counsel were
made and were unsuccessful, the court shall , except as
28 provided in subdivi sion (c) , order that the defendant be
'
SLP404661
1 provided reasonable access to any of the materials described
in subdivision (b) .
2
(b) For purposes of this section , "discovery materials" means
3 materials in the possession of the prosecution and law
enforcement authorit i es to which the same defendant would have
4 been entitled at time of trial.
5 (c) In response to a writ or motion satisfying the conditions
in subdivision (a) , court may order that the defendant be
6 provided access to phys i cal evidence for the purpose of
examination , including , but not limited to, any physical
7 evidence relating to the investigation , arrest , and
prosecution of the defendant only upon a showing that there is
8 good cause to believe that access to physical evidence is
reasonably necessary to the defendant's effort to obtain
9 re lief . The procedures for obtaining access to physical
evidence for purposes of postconviction DNA testing are
10 provided in Section 1405, and nothing in this section shall
provide an alternative means of access to physical evidence
11 for those purposes.
12 (d) The actual costs of examination or copy_i{lg pursuant . to

-- - ----- l5e borrie .. or- i"eimbursed -by the defendant.
-----·-1:nrs- sec·ti◊-n -- sffar1 ·
13
14 The Supreme Court recently examined §1054 . 9 in t he case
15 Barnett v. Superior Court, (2010) 50 Cal.4th 890 , and stated :

16 "As we have explained , the Legislature was primarily concerned
with preventing the problems that occur when the trial
17 attorney's f iles no longer exist through no fault of the
defendant . Thi s concern, together with t h e Legislature's
18 evident intent to make section 1054.9 an efficient method of
discovery , causes us to conclude that section 1054.9 requires
19 defendants who seek discovery beyond file reconstruction to
show a reasonable basis to believe that other specific
20 materials actually exist. Otherwise , a discovery request can
a l ways become , as this one has, a free-floati n g request for
21 anything the prosecution team may possess .
22 ***
23 Requiring defendants to show they have reason to believe
specific materia l s actually exist does not p l ace an onerous
24 burden on them. Defendants have access to the trial record and
to the discovery materials the prosecution provided to the
25 defense before trial . Defendants may obtain those materials
either from tria l counsel or through fi l e reconstruction . As
26 the Attorney General notes , a person could use these resources
"to make the necessary showing . For exampl e , if a witness
27 testifies about a particul ar report that the petitioner does
28
2
S LP404662
1 not possess, the petitioner would have suffici ent evidence to
justify a request for that report under section 1054 . 9 . It
2 would also be appropriate for a petitioner to seek access to
a report he or she does not possess that is cross-referenced
3 in a police report possessed by the petitioner . Similarly, if
evidence in the record indicates that a particular witness was
4 interviewed three times and the petitioner has reports
documenting only two interviews , that petitioner could make
5 the necessary showing, based on the record , that a third
report likely exists."
6
***
7 In summary, we conclude that, to be entitled to receive
discovery beyond merely recovering items that the prosecutor
8 had provided to defense counsel before trial , defendants must
sho w they have a reasonable bas i s t o believe that the specific
9 materials they seek actually exist . To obviate one concern
that pet itioner has expressed, we note that a reasonable basis
10 to believe that t he prosecution had possessed the materials in
the past would also provide a reasonable basis to believe the
11 prosecution still possesses the materials. Petitioner need not
make some additional showing that the prosecution still
12 possesses the mater ials, a showing that_ would _be im2_ossible to ..
---make·. -(1fowevef",-·-as - we- expYained iri--Steele , 1054 . 9 "imposes no
13 preservation duties that do not otherwise exist." ( Steele,
supra, 32 Cal . 4th at p. 695 . ] . ) We disapprove People v.
14 Superior Court (Maury ), supra, 145 Cal . App.4th 473, and Curl
v . Superior Court, supra, 140 Cal . App . 4th 310, to the extent
15 they are inconsistent with this opinion . "[emphasis added . )
16 Barnett v . Superior Court, supra, 50 Cal.4th 890, 895 to 901
17 Penal Code § 1 054 . 9 cannot be read in a vacuum . It must be read
18 in conjunction with what discovery was available to the defense at
19 the time of trial , as was said in In re Steele :
20 "Substantively, we conclude that section 1054 . 9 ' s

discovery includes , and is limited to , specific materials
21 the prosecution or law enforcement authorities involved in
the case currently possess t h at the defendant can show fall
22 into any of these categories : ( 1) materials the prosecutor
provided at time of trial but have since become lost to the
23 defendant, ( 2) materials t he prosecution should have
provided at time of trial, or (3) materials the defendant
24 would have been entitled to at time of trial had the
defendant specifically requested them."
25
In re Steele, (2004) 32 Cal.4th 682, 688.
26
27 It is clear from Steele that discovery sought must be from
28
3
SLP404663
1 one of the three categories and that different standards or
2 burdens the defense must meet apply to each category . Starting
3 with discovery r u les is the best way to see what was available to
4 the defense . Penal Code section 1054 . 5 , subdivision (a), states :
5 "No order requiring discovery shall be made in criminal

cases except as provided in this c hapter . This chapter
6 shall be the only means by which the defendant may compel
the disclosure or production of information from prosecuting
7 attorneys, law enforcement agencies which investigated or
prepared the case against the defendant, or any other
8 persons or agencies which the prosecuting attorney or
investigating agency may have employed to assist them in
9 performing their duties."
10 (See also , Pen. Code, § 1054 , subd. (e) ; see generally , In

re Littlefield (1993) 5 Cal .4 th 122, 129.)
11
12 H_E:_~~E:_ ~ _p~_i_?r_ ?e~~~~<?~s 9!__~~~- Cal if ornia _appellate __ co_t~_:r-j:s__nQ___

13 longer have force where inconsistent with the California
14 Constitution and statutes regarding discovery in criminal cases .
15 Penal Code section 1054 . 1 specifically defines the matte rs
16 the district attorney must disclose to the defendant. The
17 prosecutor ' s obligation extends under t his statute only to
18 information " in the possession of t he prosecuting attorney or if
19 the prosecuting attorney knows it to be in the possession of t h e
20 investigating agencies ." (Ibid.) Hence the prosecutor has no
21 general obligation to seek out information from other agencies or
22 sources for the benefit of the defense. (In re Littlefield,
23 (1993) 5 Cal . 4th 122 , 135 . ) The prosecution is responsible only
24 for that material in their possession or in the possession of the
25 investigating agency . (Kyles v. Whitley, (1995) 514 U. S . 419 . )
26 There is no duty to obtain physical evidence from third parties,
27 only a duty to make such avai l able to the defense if it comes
28
4
SLP404664
1 into the prosecutor's possession . (People v . Sanchez , (1998) 62
2 Cal . App .4 th 460, 474.)This limitation is certainly supported by
3 the reasoning of cases which have addressed this issue before the
4 adoption of Proposition 115 :

5 "From an examination of the record of the hearing on
the motion, it appears that the prosecution did not have
6 such information; however, the defense in essence argued
that i t would be easier for the prosecution to obtain it and
7 transfer it to the defense . Thus, had defendant ' s motion
been granted , compliance would have required the prosecution
8 to prepare the case for the defense . This is an obligation
not imposed by the law."
9
People v. Gurtenstein , (1977) 69 Cal.App . 3d 441, 449;
10 simil arly, see People v . Cohen , (1970) 12 Cal . App.3d 298, 323 .
11 The prosecut or has no duty to active l y invest igate the facts
12 and circumstances
- - ·- - - -- -
- - ·-- - --- - - -
of -the case or·- g_ather
- - - --·-- • - --
all 2otential evidence ··- ____ _
·- • -
13 fo r the benefit of the accused. (People v. Perez, (1979) 24
14 Cal . 3d 133, 145; People v . Gurtens t ein, supra, 69 Cal . App . 3d at
15 p. 449.) Nor are the People required to make a complete and
16 detailed accounting to the defense of all police investigative
17 work on a case . (Moore v . Illinois, (1972) 408 U.S. 786, 795 ;
18 People v . Nation, (1980) 26 Cal.3d 169, 175.)

19 In the instant case, discovery claims were constantly raised
20 by the defense before and during t r ial . The trial judge exercised
21 g r eat control over the discovery process since events occurred
22 during trial that kept producing discovery . To ensure that
23 discovery was provided , a hard copy of the case file was printed
24 and left in the courtroom for use by both the prosecution and the
25 defense . These reports were in fact used by the defense many
26 times during trial . Additionally, the defense was given hard
27 copies and/or electronic versions of discovery and required to
28
5
SLP404665
1 sign a receipt f or t h e materia l s . Moreover, the defense was given
2 carte blanche by the judge to go thr ough any materials that a
3 witness possessed and this happened frequently during trial . I t
4 became the practice of bot h parties to review prosecution
5 witnesses ' materials to ensure discovery was provided and that
6 the items were Bates stamped (See for example witness Ray Coyle
7 hearing, RT12323 to 12369) . This case involved all documents
8 being Bates stamped for the ease of both sides and as a way to
9 prove that discovery was provided . The provisions of Barnett
10 above make it clear the defense cannot say (and should not be
11 allowed to say) "gimmee , girnmee because I want it," but must make
__!.~- _~ f _f ~_r ts__to __ii_~d what _t~ i:nissing . _lie~-~ _it is ~ ~i-.mRJe__t_a,s_!< _:tor _t p_e __ _
13 defense to say, e.g . , "I am missing pages 22 to 23 , " not simply
14 "I can't find it and you have to search for it for me . " The
15 defense is attempting to apply the "file reconstruction standard"
16 onto the "additional discovery" standards and they are not the
17 same .
18 Discovery Requests
19 The Petitioner has asked for numerous items of discovery to
20 be provided, yet has failed to mention if a complete review of
21 all of the materials received has been completed . Many of the
22 requested items were clearl y provi ded during discovery and were
23 used during trial indi cating that the items were provided to the
24 defendant , yet t h ere is no corresponding declaration saying that
25 the material is missing . The People will respond to the items
26 following the same format as requested by the defense :
27 1. Raw notes and draft reports generated by the following
28
6
SLP404666
1 prosecution experts in connection with their analyses of evidence
2 submitted to them by the prosecution and agencies under its
3 control:
4 Response - Penal Code §1054 . 1 (f) requires the People to
5 disclose :
6 "Relevant written or recorded statements of witnesses or reports

of the statements of witnesses whom the prosecutor intends to
7 call at the trial , including any reports or statements of experts
made in conjuncti on with the case , including the res u lts of
8 physical or mental examinations , scientific tests, experiments ,
or comparisons which the prosecutor intends to offer in evidence
9 at the trial . "
10 There is no duty for a witness to make notes ; "Just as there is
11 no duty to preserve all notes , there is no duty to make notes in
12 _t~e_ fi_rst_ p_lace . " Peo,2_le V . Alexander[ _(198~_} , 14Q_ CaLAPP-~3d
13 647, 659[disapproved on other grounds in People v . Swain, (1996)12
14 Cal . 4th 593, 602] .
15 A. Gregory Devore, M. D . - Dr . Devore did not have notes . He
16 exp l ained during his testimony what he did , what he used and how
17 he reached his decision . All of the facts stated are also
18 documented in his report (Bates #38403 to 38406 and including
19 victim Conner ' s ultrasounds of #35354 , and 35350 . )
20 B. Allison Galloway -\Dr . Galloway ' s notes were provided_j Her
21 final report is located throughout the discovery and her notes
22 are located at pages 26792 to 26838.
23 2. Raw notes and draft reports generated by prosecution expert
24 Ralph Cheng in connection with his analysis of of the movement of
25 the bodies of Laci Peterson and Connor (sic ) Peterson in San
26 Francisco Bay. Response - See Response #1 above ; Dr . Cheng
27 produced a final report and a Powerpoint presentation, as the
28
7
SLP404667
1 defense concedes , which were both used during trial. Dr . Cheng' s
2 notes and work were provided to Det. Phil Owen of the Modesto
3 Police Department . Det . Owen took the unusual approach of
4 incorporating the notes , diagrams and emails of Dr . Cheng into
5 his police repor ts. The defense request here is mere l y an attempt
6 to make us cull through the materials and find the items for
7 which violates Gurtenstein . However, t h e G ) emails and
8 diagrams can be found at Bates# 22044 - 22072 , 31253-31259 .
9 3. Raw notes , draft reports and final reports generated by any
10 dog handlers , including but not limited to Eloise Anderson and
11 Ron Seitz, regarding their efforts to detect the scent of Laci
12 Peterson at the Berkeley Marina.

---- - - ~~ - -- --· - - - ---- ·-•---··- - -
~•·-·---- -- •· ••
13 Response - See Response #1 above . The defense misunderstands the
14 work of the dog handlers . These were search and rescue volunteers
15 and not police officers . Many of their records were maintained by
16 a third party - California Rescue Dog Association (CARDA). These
17 records were subpoenaed by the defense and t he prosecution . There
18 was extens ive litigation involving Ms . Eloise Anderson ' s dog and
19 documents and all of these records are tria l exhibits . In fact , ~

20 all of her reports and tra i ning records were used in pre-t r ial
21 litigation and most are in evidence (Bates 25222 to 25853).
22 As for Mr . Seitz , he was not a prosecution witness and his
23 information was not exculpatory as the defense claims . Seitz
24 submitted his report to CARDA (RT 1 9613) and it was provided to
25 the defense . Mr Seitz testifi ed that his dog did not hit on a
26 scent at the marina (RT 19603 to 19663) . The defense claims this
27 to be exculpatory , but it is not . There is a difference between a
28
8
SLP404668
1 witness that says I didn ' t see anything and a witness who says I
2 saw the person and i t is not the defendant . Seitz admitted that
3 his dog and Anderson ' s dog worked different areas and different
4 scent articles and that she was t he best one to testify if her __ ..,
5 dog made a hit on Laci Peterson ' s scent . (RT 19662-19663 . )There
6 is no Brady obligation , and the report was with a third party so
7 the People have no responsibility to provide it to the defense .
8 However, the information was prov i ded at Bates #2654 to 2655A,
9 27079 to 27082 , 34494, and 41691 to 41725 .
10 4. All communications , including notes of oral communications,
11 written communications and emails, between the prosecution and
12 persons under its control, and the . fo_llowing _prosecution . expfarts: . ________
- ------ -- -- -- - - - - . - - - - . . - - --- ---~ -· -- - - - - - -- -- -- -- - ----
13 A. Roy (sic) Oswalt - Once again this is request that violates
14 Gurtenstein. Rod Oswalt is a DOJ criminalist and worked on many
15 different evidence items . He testified as an expert on hair
16 comparisons and his report and notes were used du r ing the trial .
17 (See exhibit § i - All of his materials were provided to the
18 defense . The defense has everything , and if they don ' t have it,
19 it does not exist.
20 B . Ralph Cheng - Addressed above.
21 C. Gregory Devore, M.D. - Addressed above .
22 D. Allison Galloway - Addressed above .
23 E. Eloise Anderson - Addressed above
24 F. Ron Seitz - Addressed above .
25 G. Dog handlers other than Eloise Anderson and Ron Seitz who
26 brought their dogs to the Berkeley Marina in December, 2002
27 or January , 2003, in an effort to detect Laci Peterson's scent.
28
9
SLP404669
1 These were not witnesses called by the prosecut ion at tria l and
2 therefore there is no obligation on the part of the People to
3 provide this material pursuant to Penal Code §1054 . l(f) . However,
4 all of this material is contai ned within the CARDA materials or_.-
5 other reports mentioned above and easily found by the defend nt
6 without prosecution assista nce .
7 H. Any computer expert ~ y the prosecution for the
8 analysis of computers owned or used by Scott or Laci Peterson .
9 There were two computer experts who testified during preliminary
10 hearings and/or trial - Dep . Lydell Wall and Off . Kirk Stockham .
11 All of their r e e r e provided and, in the case of Dep . Wall ,

12 mo~t o! his_ repor~_ was_~sed _in ev~~~n~e~-- -
13 I. Any marine biologist consulted in reference to the presence of
14 barnacles on the remains of Laci Peterson . (See Discovery at p .
15 21841 . ) The report page cited by the defense states :
16 "Based on the presence of the barnacles and min eral deposits

associated with the body, it was determined that possibly an
17 expert in Marine Biology could be brought in to conduct an
examination r egarding those objects and help date the length
18 of time the body had been in the San Francisco Bay . "
19 There was no marine biologist who could help and none was called
20 at trial , therefore there is no obligation on the part o f the

21 Peopl to- prov'de this material pursuant to Penal Code § 105 4 . l{f)
23 5. All notes and reports generated by the Coast Guard, at the
24 request of BMCS Paul Andrieu, regarding the movement of the
25 bodies of Laci and Connor (si c) Peterson in San Francisco Bay.
26 Response - The Coast Guard s imu lation a gre d "exactly" with Dr .
27 Cheng (See Det Owen report at pagG248-49) nd Andrieu was not
28
10
SLP404670
1 called as an expert on this point at trial . Since there is no
2 discrepancy with Dr . Cheng, the material is not Brady materia l .
3 Notes were not requested to be preserved until the defense motion
4 of August 19 , 2003 , and asked for "police notesu extant on May
5 27,2003 . Pursuant to Penal Code §1054.l(f) the People have no
6 obligation to turn over this material even if it did exist .
7 However, all of this information is documented in various Det.
8 Owen reports which the defense has . Also, this is an attempt by'
9 the defense to seek discovery and not "replaceu missing items .
10 Under Steele, the defendant cannot meet his burden under any of
11 the three Za )ies

__ :: of allowa- ble discovery.
__ __ _1~ __ ~: _ ~_?_t~~! ~ videos and_ reports regarding _the .E.9lygraph _____ ____
13 examinations given to Steven Todd and Glenn Pearce.
14 Respons e - The reports documenting these two polygraphs were
15 provided to the defense (4161 to 4164) . The videotapes were
16 provided as discovery as video #V27 and #V28 which were signed
17 for by the defense on 9/12/03 . There are no known notes other
18 than what is in the final reports.
19 7. Notes of , or correspondence with , any marine biologist or
20 e xpert in barnacles consulted by or hired by the prose cution or
21 agencies under its control, to evaluate the barnacles found on
22 the remains and clothing of Laci Peterson.
23 Response - There are none and none ever existed. When the bodies
24 were first recovered with barnacles, it was thought that it might
25 be possible to "ageu or tell how old a barnacle was . A university
26 professor was asked if this could be done and he said no . No
27 further action was taken . This was not Brady and is not required
28
11
SLP404671
1 to be disclosed pursuant to Penal Code §1054 . l(f) .
2
3 8. Defendant/Petitioner further requests that the prosecution
4 make available to his attorney and his investigators, the
5 following articles of evidence, for inspection and photographing :
6 The pants and barnacles recovered from Laci Peterson's body after
7 it washed ashore in San Francisco Bay.
8 Response - The People object . Penal Code §1054.1 (c) states that
9 the prosecution is required to disclose all "relevant real
10 evidence seized or obtained as a part of the investigation of the
11 offenses charged ." That was done in this case .
___ ]:_~ _____ In_ 2003,_ tr1e _defense performed a _second aut(?.ps y _ of the _______ _
13 victims in this case, conducted by Dr . Cyril Wecht and Henry Lee .
14 All items of physical evi dence were made available for
15 examination . During the defense autopsy, extensive photographs,
16 measurements , microscopic evaluations and samples were taken from
17 each victim . The defendant should have these materials still
18 available to him , since this was a defense examination of
19 prosecution evidence. If it is lost , since this was a defense
20 examination , the first prong of Steele cannot be met - file
21 reconstruction.
22 According to the Steele case , there are two other categories
23 remaining that allow the defense to seek additional discovery.
24 The first remaining category consists of "materials t h e
25 prosecution s hould have provided at time of trial," and the last
26 category is of "materials the defendant would have been entitled
27 to at time of trial had the defendant speci fically requested
28
12
SLP404672
1 them." Both of these categories presuppose that the defendant did
2 NOT receive these items . That is not the case here, so under
3 Steele the defense is not entitled to examine t h e physical
4 evidence AGAIN .
5 Assuming that 1054 . 9(c)allows the defense to do as it claims
6 here, that subdivision s t ates :
7 "In response to a writ or motion satisfying the conditions

in subdivision (a), court may order t hat the defendant be
8 provided access to physical evi dence for the purpose of
examination , including , but not limit ed to, any physical
9 evidence relating to the investigat ion, arrest , and
prosecution of the defendant only upon a showing that there
10 is good cause to believe that access to physical evidence is
reasonably necessary to the defendant's effort to obtain
11 relief . "
12 -------~12_€:_ ~ ~J ~nse has failed to ~how good cause__ for this re-________ ____ _
13 examination. The sole basis stated is that the defense claims
14 that Dr . Ga lloway suggested that a marine biologist be consulted ,
15 however that is not what the report states :
16 "Based on the presence of the barnacles and mineral deposits

associated with the body, it was determined that possibly an
17 expert in Marine Biology could be brought in to conduct an
examination regarding those objects and help date the length
18 of time the body had been in the San Francisco Bay . " ~
1
19 As set forth above,~arine biologist could not help . However,
20 there is nothing to stop the defense from consulting their own
21 marine biologist who could then assist them in determining if a
22 re-examination was necessary , since they have photos and defense
23 video. The defense has already examined the bodies and was
24 allowed to take samples from the remains, but there has been no
25 showing that the defense has a need to get again what they may
26 have already taken .
27 Lastly , so that t h is court is aware, a large portion of t h e
28
13
SLP404673
1 barnacles were attached to the body (see Bates reports 17304,
2 17337, 26797)and the body was returned to the family for burial .
3 There were barnacles attached to the tape on the body and the
4 pants . (See pages 237 53 , 38516 and associated photographs . )
5 New Issues
6 Subsequent to the fi ling of this motion, the defense has
7 sought additional items. Many of those requests have been
8 resolved informally . The defense states that they are missing
9 disks 1 to 62 . I f the court is to order the People to re - copy all
10 of this mater ial for the defendant, the People would point out
11 §1054 . 9(d), which states :
_ 12_ - ~'The a~~~a_l __c::_

<?_5_~~ . o__!_~~am~-:1~.~ ion_ or_ copying p~~s~an_!: _t<2_ this
13 section shall be borne or reimbursed by t he defendant . "
14 Conclusion
15 The People ask the Court to resolve this matter as suggested
16 by the People and make the defendant pay for the People's costs
17 associated with his request .
18
19 Dated this 7th day of November, 2011 at Modesto , California .

20
21 Respectfully submitted,
22 BIRGIT FLADAGER
District Attorney
23
24
25
David P . Harris
26 Chief Deputy District Attorney
27
28
14
SLP404674
SUPERIOR COURT, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF STANISLAUS
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA v. SCOTT PETERSON
NATURE OF HEARING: Status Conference re Correction/Settlement of the

Record
Habeas Corpus - Discovery Motion
CASE NO: Stanislaus County: 1056770

San Mateo County: 55500A
Supreme Court: . S132449
JUDGE: SCOTT T. STEFFEN Bailiff: NONE Date: November 18, 2011

Clerk : M. MART I NEZ Reporter: _D . L e e Modesto, California
Appearances: For the People: Birgit Fladager and David Harris

For the Defendant: Cliff Gardner and Lawrence Gibbs -
Also present: Michelle Bailey, Clerk in the court's appeals unit
The paities met with the court to asce1tain the status of the various tasks that remain in order to complete
the settlement of the record. As of the date of the Status Conference, the following remained as open
issues with regard to completion of the record, based on items identified at previous status conferences.
Record Conection/Settlement:
The following outstanding record requests were addressed:
1. Petitioner has yet to receive the guilt phase instructions requested and refused, referred to at
20 CT 6128.
The court requests that counsel review their files to dete1mine if they have copies of those
documents; if not, they are to review the Reporter's Transcript to dete1mine what instructions
were requested, refused and/or modified.
2. The court previously directed counsel to identify all exhibit references in the opening
statements and closing arguments.
Counsel have each prepared an exhibit thataccomplishes that task. Counsel will meet and
confer to identify any discrepancies in those exhibits, and resolve to the extent possible.any
such discrepancies. Any unresolved issues shall be identified and brought to the comt's
attention no later than the next status conference.
3. All other outstanding issues previously identified have been resolved. Mr. Gardner will
prepare and circulate to Mr. Harris a corrected clerk's transcript to reflect corrections
resolving previously identified issues.
Habeas Corpus Discovery Issues:

I ,
1. Raw notes and draft reports generated by Gregory Devore, M.D.
The People state that they have delivered all written communications, including draft reports,
that were provided to them. The People are not required to obtain any raw notes, draft
reports, etc., that were not communicated by Dr. Devore to the People.
Petitioner also seeks the Excel spreadsheets that Dr. Devore used in preparing his report.
The court finds that the _spreadsheet does not fall within the materials required to be
discovered under Penal Code section 1054.1, nor is it Brady material. The request for the
Excel spreadsheet is denied.
2. Raw notes and draft repo1ts generated by Dr. Allison Galloway.
All raw notes, draft reports and other communications from Dr. Galloway to the People have
been discovered.
Both defense and habeas counsel are missing pages 26792 through 27087. The People are to
provide copies of those pages to Mr. Gardner and Mr. Gibbs as record reconstruction
materials. (See Barnett v. Superior Court (2010) 50 Cal.4th 890, 897 ~898.)
3. Raw notes and draft reports generated by Dr. Ralph Cheng.
Petitioner seeks raw notes,.draft reports and other communications from Dr. Cheng. The
People stated that the raw notes were provided by Dr. Cheng to Modesto Police Detective
Phil Owen, who included the raw notes in his police report, which has been discovered.
Petitioner is concerned that portions of the raw notes may not have been included in
Detective Owen's report.
Mr. Harris is to contact Detective Owen to determine if his police report contained the
entirety of Dr. Cheng's raw notes. If not, Mr. Harris shall obtain all of the raw notes that Dr.
Cheng provided to Detective Owen, and discover those to Petitioner.
4. Raw notes and draft reports generated by Roy Oswalt.
The People have complied with Petitioner's discovery request.
5. Raw notes, draft reports and final reports generated by dog handler Eloise Anderson.
No written materials exist.
6. Raw notes, draft reports and final reports generated by Ron Seitz.
The People have complied with their discovery obligations, including their Brady
obligations, with respect to Mr. Seitz.
The primary issue regarding Mr. Seitz's dog was that Ms. Anderson's dog indicated the
presence of Laci Peterson on the boat ramp, whereas Mr. Seitz's dog did not alert. However,
after hearing argument of counsel at the hearing on Petitioner's discovery motion, the comt
believes that Mr. Seitz's dog did not examine the same areas as Ms. Anderson's dog.
Accordingly, there is no discrepancy between the observations of Ms. Anderson's dog and
Mr. Seitz's dog that warrants discovery. In any event, the People stated that they provided
all Brady material to trial counsel.
7. Notes, repo1ts and other communications of other dog handlers at the marina.
Petitioner seeks notes, reports, and other information utilized by the dog handlers in
completing the CARDA forms that comprise Post-Conviction Exhibit A. According to the
infom1ation provided at the hearing on Petitioner's motion for discovery, pre-trial discovery
issues relating to this info1mation were litigated, and are likely in the files of Petitioner's trial
counsel. This request is denied without prejudice. The comt will revisit this issue in the
event Petitioner is unable to locate this information in his files.
8 . . Coast Guard notes and reports regarding the potential movement of the bodies of the victims
in the bay.
The People are to inquire o.f the Coast Guard to determine if the Coast Guard has a modeling
report dated January 27, 2003, and whether the Coast Guard has a document or documents
that contain the assumptions that were utilized in generating the modeling report. The People
shall provide any such documents to Petitioner.
9. Notes or correspondence with marine biologists regarding barnacles on the victim's clothing.
There are no such records.
10. Polygraph charts of burglars Steven Todd and Donald Pearce.
The results of the polygraph examinations are not admissible. (Evid. Code,§ 351.1.) The
validity of the polygraph examiner's conclusions are in-elevant, and could not lead to
admissible evidence. Therefore, the graphs that were the subject of the polygraph examiner's
conclusions are not discoverable.
11. Access to view and photograph the tape, the victim's clothing, and the barnacles on the
clothing.
The IJeople concede that Petitioner is entitled to view the items identified in Petitioner's
discovery request. Counsel for the parties are to meet and confer to work out a time to
provide access by Petitioner.
Future Hearings:
The court sets January 6, 2012, at 10:0o· a.m. for final resolution of the outstanding issues
relating to the record. Assuming that the parties will not raise complicated issues, the comt has no
objection to a telephonic appearance by counsel for Mr. Peterson.
PROOF OF SERVICE BY MAIL
[1013a(3) C.C.P.]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
) ss
COUNTY OF STANISLAUS )
I am over the age of 18 years and employed by the Superior Comt of the State of California, County of
Stanislaus, and not a pa1ty to the within action.
I certify that I served a copy of the attached Order following Status Conference by placing said copy in
an envelope addressed to the following:
David P. HaiTis Lawrence Gibbs

Chief Deputy District Attorney P. 0. Box 7639
832 12th Street, Suite 300 Berkeley, CA 94707
Modesto, CA 95354
California Appellate Project
Glenn Pruden 101 2nd Street
Office of the Attorney General San Francisco, CA 94105
455 Golden Gate Avenue
Suite 11000 Comtesy Copy:
San Francisco, CA 94102
Michelle Bailey
Cliff Gardner Stanislaus County Superior Court
1448 San Pablo Avenue Appeals Unit
Berkeley, CA 94606 (by email)
Said envelope was tc ; sealed and postage thereon fully prepaid, and thereafter was on
=·::::t=c..S) \/\ --- , 2012, deposited in the United States mail at Modesto, California. That there
is delivery service by United States mail at the place so addressed, or regular communication by United
States mail between the place of mailing and the place so addressed.
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and
correct.
Executed onUcp_, 1,, ~ , 2012, at Modesto, California

OFFICE OF SUPERIOR COURT ADMINISTRATOR
State of California, in a.r-d for the County of Stanislaus
By \l\k, \ o_,S) ~ ,:s-&c:C \N\_cµ!"~~ )

Deputy Clerk
0
EXHIBIT 4
EXHIBIT4
Declaration of Susan Medina
-.
Declaration of Susan Medina
I, Susan Medina, hereby declare under penalty of perjury that the following is true
and accurate to the best of my knowledge:

5
I. In December 2002, my husband Rodolfo ("Rudy") and J11ived at 516 Covena Avenue in
~ d 1,vt'V)~ in Wi ·
Modesto, California. W e ~ the house in'May 1979 and lived there until 2012. Our
house was directly across the street from the residence of Laci and Scott Peterson at 523
Covena.
2. Our neighborhood was very close-knit. Our neighbors all looked out for one another, and
11
would take notice when something was amiss in the neighborhood.
12
3. I recall instances of seeing Laci interacting with people out on the street. In one instance,
lJ
I was inside my home and recall Laci yelling at some teenagers who were in her yard and
15 I.ell them to get out of her yard. I also recall having a conversation with one of our
16 neighbors, Lil Ikerd, about an incident she witnessed involving Laci. Lil told me she
I7
witnessed Laci confronting and yelling nt some people who were fighting in the street on
Coveno. I believe that conversation occurred after Laci's disappenrance. We both

Io
commented on how Laci was "feisty" and protective in that way. Lil, who was herself
21 Portugese, commented that that must be "the Portuguese" in Laci. Lil is QOW deceased.
22 4. I recall another occasion when I wa.~ outside my home pruning some of my plants. Laci
23
spotted me and came !IP to me ~5¥.!'~sc she saw that I was doing a terrible job of pruning.
ir1 d- fo/1~-v./U/ '>!'n
She told m9 that I wasn't ptii'ning my plants correctly, and that there was a better way to
do it if I wanted to help them grow better. I recall that while thinking Laci was very polite,
2i it was also very bold of her to come tell me how to do my ~ g . ffttvttl";5 -,?'h
DECLARATION OF SUSAN MEDINA

I
5. When we first moved to the neighborhood, there was not much foot or bike traffic on
2
Covena. Back then, typically the only people out and about on the street lived in the
3 neighborhood. At some point, the city constructed a pedestrian walk-way bridge over Dry
Creek in the park, connecting Scenic Drive to Covena Avenue. When this bridge went
s
up. there was a large increase in foot and bike traffic on our street. This created a
6
thoroughfare for people from the Airport District, which was a fairly high crime area.
7
8 travelling on foot or bike to the area of Modesto north of the park. lri :,
9 6. The presence of homeless and transient people also increased when the Modesto Gospel .y ..\, ~
tt+- ~
10
Mission opened al the comer of Yosemite and Ruffino Avenue, which operatedJas an
11
overnight homeless sheller. I recall that every morning around 6 a.m. the shelter would
12
13
close and the occupants would have to leave for the day, many of them travelling on foot
H through our neighborhood. With the increase in foot traffic, we also started to have more
'~ IS
( people digging through our trash and recycling on a regular basis. We started taking added
g
16
) precautions when we noticed an increase in foot and bicycle traffic on our street.
17
.• 18
7. On December 24, 2002, we were in the final stages of constructing a covered patio in our
19
backyard. The covered patio was on the south and east sides of the house as depicted by
the shading below. Attachment A is a photo accurately depicting the patio constmction on
r
I
20
21 December 24, 2002. (The photo was taken some time afier December 24, 2002.) The photo
!: 22
j shows a south facing side of our home.
~
23
i 2~
.-•
~ 2S
I
k
?f
I 2,
I 2~
DECLARATION Of SUSAN MEDINA

2
Pe1erso11 Home
523 Covena
Medina Home
5 16 Covena
l North
Vi!.irection depicted
French doors
in Attachment A
10
11 8. The patio still had the appearance of an unfinished project because the framing and
underside of the new patio cover had bare wood and was not yet painted.
IJ
9. When we left home at around 10:30 a.m. on December 24, 200~e had large manila
I .;
mo~+ly qr,11 •
envelopes as outgoing mail in our mailbox. (I worke<JI from home and mailed out several
JS
16 Manila envelopes that day to applicants.) The mailbox was located to the right of our front
door. Attachment B is an accurate depiction of our mailbox and where it was located on
18
December 24, 2002. (The photo was taken some time after December 24, 2002.)
19
10. Attachment C is an accurate depiction of what the ou1going mail looked like in our
20
mailbox the morning of December 24, 2002. (The photo was taken after 2002.)
21
22 11 . When we left our house around I0:30 a.m. on December 24, 2002 to go out of town to
23 visir relatives over the Christmas holiday, we locked the gate to our backyard before
leaving. As we were driving down Covena, Rudy pointed a man out to me that looked
suspicious. This man was wearing a flannel shirt and was slowly riding past our house on
a bike while heading north on the east side ofCovcna. 1-lc was not actively peddling whe.n
2i
28 we passed him but was kind ofslowly walking his bike. He was a white man and the look
• J, ·.
DECLARATION or SUSAN Mrni'NA
3
2
of him made me feel uncomfonablc. I-le looked out of place and something about him
made me nervous. We circled the block by turning right on Encina, right on Santa Barbara,
I
• 5
7
right on Highland, right on E~gebrook, and right on Covcna. It would have only taken us
less than a minute to circle the block. I did not see the man when we drove back by our
home on Covcna. With the way that Covena is situated, had he taken the path into the
park. we would have seen him by the time we circled back but we did not see where he
I
8 went.
9
12. When we returned from our trip to LA on December 26, 2002, we were shocked by the
10
presence of so many media vans on Covena. After showing our IDs to law enforcement
ll
on Coveoa, we approached our house. I remember Rudy noticing our dolly in the front
12
lJ yard as we pulled in. Rudy entered the back doors of our house. which had been kicked
14 in. and had me wait outside. Rudy thm came running out of the house and announced
lS
that we had been robbed. Immediately the police which were focused on the Peterson's
16
home, started coming over to us and our residence and we reported the burglary.
17
13. TI1e detectives were going back and forth between the Peterson residence and our house.
19
19 I remember being concerned that with all the media there, that the reporters were going to
20 think that we were suspects in whatever had happened at the Peterson home since the
21
police were now looking at our house. I was also concerned because they were not
22
wearing shoe coverings when going back and forth between the houses and I was
23
concerned about cross contamination of evidence.
2~
2~ 14. At some point. I remember Doug Lovell coming over to our residence. He was working
26 with the Modesto Police Department. I knew Doug's wife Peggy through work. I recall
27
Doug coming into our house to look at evidence. I walked him and the detectives through I
i '
28
I,

4
the house, pointing out things that were out of place. I had just cleaned the house ahead
2 of our trip, so I could tell what had been 1ouched by lhe burglars. I recall offering to the
3 police that they could lake the French doors if they needed them as evidence. I remember
I 1hey had been kicked in and there was a footprint on the doors. They declined to take the
II
5
doors.
15. I remember when we entered bur master bedroom, Rudy's hammer from his shed and one
,
of his work gloves were on our bed. The head of the hammer was wrapped in the glove
8
9 in such a way that made me think it was being used to suppress tbe noise of using the
'I
10
hammer 10 hit something. I do not believe the poljsf collec1ed ei1hcr the hammer or the l
11
Ull/;t u/- f'e CA// wl~'/N,r ~ p,,,, -
I
glove. I ;le .:at eelio c tl11 ,-swabbed either 6r them or checked them for fingerprints.
12
13 16. Also on 1he bed was a sta1uc of the Virgin Mary, which had been on top of the safe. Again,
H I recall poin1ing that out to the police so that they would know 1hat the burglars touched
1;
that. Next to the statue was an envelope that I kept our monthfy allowance of cash in. I
H
recall there being about S400 in the .envelope when we ten. When we returned, the
1.
envelope was missing the majority of the cash.
19
10 17. When I suggested that the police fingerprint items in our home that had been touched or
2J disturbed, the detective told me th~l I "watched too much CSL"

21
18. Before 2000, my husband and I were concerned about Y2K, so we made sure that we had
22
stash of cash in our home, amounting to around $50,000. Alier 2000, we started spending
23
some ofth_e cash, taking out around $10,000 for a trip to Denver to celebrate our parent's
2~
25 anniversary. Afier various expenditures, we had roughly $30,000 lcfi in the safe in O /I ~.
. !'Ant r Y'"'
2€ December 2002. The cash was stored in paper wrapped bundles inside of a ~~Ot.l A , ~ e _
2,
t.!~(1&
f''l,--:,
?,,...,
~'✓"
.. ~ ~-
.Afflcrieacashba '
_, t..
DECLARATION OF SUSAN ~!EDINA

s
• f
19. Inside our home we had a calendar on the side of the refrigerator that noted both myself
and Rodolfo ("Rudy'") were ofT work. The calendar noted " LA" on December 25th and
"RT 1-1 from LA" ( Return home from LA) on December 26th. Attachment Dis a copy of
the actual calendar that was on our refrigerator on December 24, 2002.
20. When we returned from our trip, we checked out mailbox. I specifically recall that only
3 items were in my mailbox including one red envelope containing a Christmas card, one
s "have you seen me" mass mailer. and a 3x5 solicitation. The "have you seen me" mailer
9
was not related to Laci Peterson. The three items of mail were small and did not protrude
10
from my mai lbox.
ll
2 1. After Rudy and I learned about Laci's disappearance, we immediately became concerned
12
IJ and did what we could to offer relief to the Peterson family. We asked them to use our
home as a safe place to get away from the media frenzy that was ongoing constantly in
15
front of their home. I recall one day when Scott's father, Lee, was mowing the lawn,
IE
people gathered in the street were shouting obscenities at him. The bright lights from the
17
media vans were a constant presence. I recall getting a pair of red slippers for Scott's
15
mother, fackie, so she could put them on and relax when she came over to my house to
20
1
)
get away from the chaos going on outside her son and daughter-in-law's home.
t
21
22. I recall one evening right after we returned home and learned that Laci was missing, Scott
t
22
was at our house and I stood next to him to try to comfort him. I told him that Rudy and
23
21 I were concerned because among the items that were in our safe that was stolen were two
guns of Rudy's. The guns were licensed and registered but we would have felt horrible if
any hann came to Laci through the use of our guns. When I was telling Scott of our
Ohl- ha.t10 OY' J,i,i·,;. >hourdA.-<- k
concerns, he started to cry. I put my 11m, 11round hi1:i+to comfort him. .,V' • •
29

6
23. We were told that the police arrested two individuals for the burglary. The police never
2 showed either me or my husband any pictures of the men that they had arrested to see if
3 we could identify them. When I think back, I can't help but wonder if the man we saw
I s
just before leaving our house who was on a bike was involved. I feel that had I been
shown a picture of him back then, I may have been able to identify him.
6
7
24. The police then started coming by our house to show us items that they had recovered to
8 sec if they were our property. While some of the property they showed me was mine,
9
there were also items that did not belong to me. I recall being shown jewelry that included
I'
a small opal stone, a tiny sapphire, and a little emerald ring that were not mine. I also
11
recall seeing jewelry that I thought were fake and did not recognize. I informed the
I2
13 officers that those were not mine. There were also items of jewelry of mine that were
14 never recovered.
15
25. Also, the cash that we had stored in the safe was never returned to us. I recall the police
16
showing tis the money wrappers matching the paper wrappers that had been around the
11 h
bundles ofcash we had, but we were told that no cash was recovered.
18
19 26. One of the police detectives doing the investigation mentioned to me that one of the
20 burglars admitted to making a call from inside our home.

21
27. I was never asked by police whether my husband or I heard anything unusual coming from
22
the Peterson home on the evening of December 23, such as arguing or shouting, before
2j
we left for our trip. I recal I that we did not hear anything unusual or any indications of a
24
2~ fight on that night or on any other occasion. The only time there was noise from the
2€ Peterson home was during football season and Scott would always come to let us know
n
\.'
28

7
;• I
ahead of lime that they were having people over. On those occasions I would leave our
I
lights on so we could provide extra security for his gue~ •
28. When we w;nt 6n our trip, we lefi our dog, ~~~in

the back yard of our residence.
P(Q11~ , •
llriMeess \Vould often bark whenever anyone approached our ~ouse. ~ the burglary
i),a,..~~r -
happened in the middle of the ni~ht or early morning, ~ would certainly have
barked and made a ruckus. No neighbors, police, search party members, or anyone else
o· ~
ever reported to us that J:lri~~~de :ny noises early in the morning on December 26.
9
29. I have always been bothered by the lack of investigation of the burglary of our home and
ll
the possible connection to Laci's disappearance and murder.
I have reviewed this declaration in its entirety and it is accurate to the best of my
'
i
l
14 the foregoing is true and correct.
15
16
/ ,
11 Date Susan Medina
lS
20
21
2J
24
26
2,
2,
DECLA RATION Of SUSAN MEDINA

8
II
if
EXHIBIT A
ATTACHMENT A
EXHIBIT B
ATTACHMENT B
EXHIBIT C
ATTACHMENT C
Photo of Median mailbox taken in 2009. The mailbox has been relocated from it’s
it's previous
previous location near
near the front door to constructed wall in
the front yard.
yard. This photo depicts
photo depicts how the outgoing
outgoing mail looked on December 24,
24, 2002.
EXHIBIT D
ATTACHMENT D
IT,t,'ITO,~ •
~ 1C:ALD1CAft No111: tloldll)'Jl!l'4 pay.-ttoda -.r.u,,. ,WD.a,. M>ilctao. , . , ~ ~ IDl'Nllltl'U ,..__,1nnsa,v.., 1ffi-.2COO~lllndl,
SUNDAY MONDAY 1VESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSDAY FRIDAY SA7VRDAY
t 2 3 4 5 6 7
1..A
~.,I~
',f.4},~
I~. L,!_ _ .
8
6tiv.,
J9
/l~D
"'" !$If
1/N~~- · -
1'0
pl. /S,JI
11
l1oj74
Iv- ,~·.3 J,t/. /f.3
--·
13
,-,;~, r ~/,
14
- 1~·3
1.I .,,,,,..,•
LA- ~ • l l-1.#•N 'I Jo.•
16 lG I"·• 17 18 19 21
6 II ~ IIJ/7/
'&,i '>..-.•~ ,_ ,.,,.. ;:~/:6~ .v . /~3 lr-f·/~_ 1,v. . 1.rs IN• .t-6¥
u;.,f!,, .I,,~
i,,. ,,,
22 •
~{l. ~- 24 :ez,, ~ ·~25-uf----~✓--
23 28 ,~_....
rv·27o/ · :t
I 20
ll'#o ./. ~ ~ .A:,:-••!!&
ill -,,;
r -µ
Iii •aw:, .Y.11e
,~ ~ -~d.
-': +-"
·~
I ~a.,
I
.:J~:ll002
~?I I•lul T!Vfl•!,f, 2•1 \ 1•1Mlt!wjr
.-...,1Cto
. I.,Je)
,,.__ £c., .;, - &~ I
3 • S I l I I
IOH 12 ffH 15 II
11 It "20 21 12 23
1234
6 9 1' I I 10 ii
1, '3 ·• 1511 '1 II
\IUIUI ti Z:, N ft
,.,,,_,.,,.,,., ·-~..;·.1: '4 215 1' r, 211 :II ,i> M 27 28 :II » 31
•• °'47 DECEMBER 2002

EXHIBIT 5
EXHIBIT
Declaration of Carl Jensen
LAWRENCE A. GIBBS
(State Bar No. 98866)
P.O. Box 7639
Berkeley, California 94707
Tel: (510) 525-6847
email: [email protected]
Attorney for Petitioner

Scott Lee Peterson
IN THE SUPREME COURT
OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
In re SCOTT LEE PETERSON, ) No. S _ __ _

)
On Habeas Corpus. ) Stanislaus No. 1056770
) San Mateo No. SC55500A
)
DECLARATION OF CARL W. JENSEN

IN SUPPORT OF PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
I, Carl W. Jensen, declare as follows:
1. In 2003 to 2005, I was a private investigator in California. I worked as
an investigator for the defense in the case of People v. Scott Lee Peterson, in which
Scott Peterson was charged with, and tried for, the murder of his pregnant wife, Laci.
2. In the course ofmy pretrial investigation, I interviewed Steven Todd, one
of the men who burglarized the Medina home across the street from the Peterson's
home on Covena Street in Modesto, California.
HCP-000430
3. I intcrviewe<l Todd three times in 2004. l understood that Todd had
claimerl that he had committed the burglary on December 26. 2002. During my third
l.o~u.M'
interview with Mr. Todd occurred on August 27.~ in the San Mateo County Jail.
This was was in the middle of Mr. Peterson ·s trial. I confronted Todd with Diane
Jackson's statements that she had seen a safe on the front lawn ofthe Medina home and
a van parked in front of that home, at 11 :40 a.m., on December 24, 2002. r11 response,
Todd became what I would describe as "unglued." Todd came out of his chair, put his
hands on the table and leaned toward me, yelling words to the effect that "you don •t
have a witness," and ..you don' t have a fucking thing." At that point. the female deputy
sheriff came into the room to ask ifl was ok. [ told her ••we·re fine."
4. Todd was so angry that he informed me that he would invoke his right
to remain silem if he were called to testify about the burglary.
5. Additionally, in that same interview, Todd informed me that he was ··so
high on meth and crack for three days that 1 don't really remember anything 1 did."
Todd later explained that this lhree day period was from December 24 to December
I declare under penalty of perjury under the law of the State of California and
the U nitcd States that the foregoing is true to the best of my knowledge.
~c>
Executed this U day of July, 2015 in Cleveland County. No
HCP-000431
EXHIBIT 6
EXHIBIT
Declaration of Gary
Gary Ermoian
1 Declaration of Gary Ermolan
2 T, Gary Ennoian, hereby declare under penalty of perjury that the following is true and
4 1. I am a private investigator licensed by the state of California. My state Jicense
s number is PI8855. I am also a member of the California Association of Licensed Investigators
6 (CALI) and Thold a Certified Professional Investigator certification with the associati_on.
7 2. I have been employed full-time in law enforcement and private investigation for
a over 43 years. My assignments have included: criminal investigations; civil investigations;
9 homicide investigation/special circumstances; trial preparation; interviews and interrogations;
10 background investigations; employment screening; photography; records searches; surveillance;
11 and, consultations and training, among others.
12 3. I have a Doctorate in Criminal Justice and Criminology and was a General Partner
13 and Instructor at the California School of Investigation from 2003 to 2019. My assignments
14 included developing curriculum and instruction in the following courses: Administration of
1s Justice; Private Investigation; Computer Forensic Investigations; Conducting Criminal Defense
16 Investigations; Criminal Investigations and the Law; Investigation of Sex Crimes; Practical
11 Spanish for Law Enforcement and Investigators; Surveillance and Undercover Investigations;
1a Vice and Narcotics Investigations; SB 1626 School Campus Safety Training; and, Training
19 Strategics for a Safe School Environment.
20 4. Prior to becoming a private investigator, I was a Deputy Sheriffwith the Stanislaus
21 County Sheriffs Department for four years from 1976 to 1980.
22 5. In August 2023, T was contacted by lawyers with the Los Angeles Innocence
23 Project. They informed me that they were investigating the case of People v. &ott Peterson,
24 which I had been involved with as an investigator. I agreed to speak with them about my
25 involvement with the case.
26 6. I was asked to provide Mr. Peterson's attorneys with my views and opinions of the
27 investigation the Modesto Police Department conducted into the disappearance of Laci Peterson,
2a based on my decades of experience as an investigator and law enforcement officer, and my years
DECLARATION OF GARY ERMOIAN

I
1 as a private investigator working on criminal cases in Modesto, and my familiarity with the MPD
2 personnel involved in the investigation in Scott Peterson's case. I agreed to do so.
3 JANUARY 2003
4 7. In late December 2002, I was contacted by attorney Kirk McAllister regarding the
s missing person investigation into Laci Peterson's disappearance. Kirk explained that he had been
6 retained by Scott Peterson, Lad's husband Kirk wanted me to go with him to meet with Scott
7 and Scott's father so we could understand what was going on and get as much information as
a possible.
9 8. I learned that the Modesto Police Department was targeting Scott as their main
10 suspect, accusing him of being responsible for his wife's disappearance, and executing search
11 warrants to search for evidence that would show he was guilty.
12 9. I met with Scott Peterson and he explained to me that he was concerned about
13 finding his wife and that he had nothing to do with her disappearance. He was worried that
14 because the police were focusing their investigation on him, valuable time was being lost in the
15 search to find his wife and finding out what happened to her.
16 10. Scott explained that the police were questioning his whereabouts on December 24.
17 He stated that he had gone to Berkeley Marina and put his fishing boat in the water there sometime
1a around mid-day on December 24, and that he had seen a few people there that day who could
19 confirm he was telling the truth.
20 11. Scott stated that Laci told him she was going to take their dog for a walk the
21 morning of December 24, after he left home for the day and we discussed the importance of
22 canvassing the neighborhood to try to determine if anyone actually saw her walking the dog.
23 12. I recall that Scott was assisting in the search for Laci by working with a community
24 volunteer center that had been set up at the Red Lion Inn in downtown Modesto. The volunteer
2s center was receiving calls and tips from community members who were calling in to report
26 information they believed may be helpful in finding Laci Peterson. Some of the callers were
27 reporting that they had called the Modesto Police Department tip line and left messages but they
28 were not hearing back from anyone to follow up on their information.

2
1 BERKELEY MARINA
2 13. Initially, the police were questioning Scott's alibi and claiming that they were
3 unable to confirm he had gone to Berkeley Marina, as he had told them. I was notified that on
4 January 4, 2003, a City of Berkeley gardener who works at Berkeley Marina named Michael
s llvesta emailed the tip line the Peterson family had set up and reported that he had seen Scott and
6 his truck and trailer at the marina on December 24. On January 7, 2003, J interviewed Mr. Ilvesta
7 and he told me that he saw Scott at the marina on December 24, 2002. He identified Scott and
a his truck from the photographs that were circulating at the marina. Mr. Ilvesta recalled that he
9 was driving through the parking area and saw that Scott was having a bit of trouble turning and
1o backing his trailer down the launch ramp and he had to stop and wait because there wasn't enough
11 room for a vehicle to pass when someone is backing down the launch ramp. Mr. llvesta stated
12 that he reported what he saw to MPD Det. Rick Annendariaz. A copy of my memorandum
13 documenting my interview with Mike Ilvesta is attached hereto as Exh. A.
14 14. On January 7, 2003, I also contacted David Johnson, who told me that he was at
15 Berkeley Marina on December 24 and saw Scott's Ford pickup truck and trailer parked in the
16 parking lot near the launch. He explained that on Friday, January 3, 2003, he heard on the news
17 that the Modesto Police Department was looking for people to confirm that they saw Scott or his
1a vehicle at the marina. Mr. Johnson explained that he called the police on Friday, Saturday, and
19 Monday, trying to give a statement and was finally able to speak to Det. Grogan on the third try.
20 Mr. Johnson stated that he was "ticked oft" because the police were not making any effort to talk
21 to the people who live at the marina to confirm Scott's information that he was there that day. He
22 agreed to compile a list of names of people who were also at the marina and may have information
23 and provide it to me.
24 15. On January 8, 2003, Mr. Johnson faxed me the information he was able to gather
25 concerning possible witnesses who may have seen Scott at the marina on December 24 along with
26 drawings he made to assist me with my investigation.
27 16. I contacted Mr. Johnson again on January 9, to follow up on the information he
2s provided. Mr. Johnson explained that it would be impossible for anyone to conceal a large object

3
1 in a small, open aluminum boat such as Mr. Peterson's boat because after launching the boat
2 would have to pass by a11 of the docked boats in the area, which were inhabited by residents at
3 the time. A copy of my memoranda documenting my interviews with David Johnson and the
4 information he provided to me are attached hereto as Exh. B.
5 17. On January 9, 2003, 1 contacted Dave Casey, who worked at Berkeley Marina.
6 Mr. Casey stated that he had been repairing boats at that location for over 30 years and that he
7 was there on December 24, but he did not recall seeing Mr. Peterson. Mr. Casey stated that it was
a the season to fish for sturgeon and that it was not at all unusual to see boats the size of Scott's in
9 the bay fishing for sturgeon. He said that this size boat is actually the boat of choice for people
10 who fish for sturgeon. A copy of my memorandum documenting my interviews with Dave Casey
11 is attached hereto as Exh. C.
12 18. On January 9, 2003, I contacted Nick Clinton, who had a boat docked near the
13 public launch at Berkeley Marina. Mr. Clinton stated that he recalled seeing one small vessel
14 going out from the public launch that day and one truck and trailer in the parking lot on December
1s 24, but after looking at photos he could not say that Scott's truck and trailer were the same truck
16 and trailer he saw that day. Mr. Clinton suggested I talk to Yuri Faria, who was also on his boat
17 with him that day because Mr. Faria was standing in the cockpit while Mr. Clinton was down in
1a the cabin working on the boat engine. A copy of my memorandum documenting my interview
19 with Nick Clinton is attached hereto as Exh. D.
20 19. On January 9, 2003, I contacted Yuri Faria, who lived on his boat at Berkeley
21 Marina. Mr. Faria told me he was at the marina on December 24 and recalled seeing Scott's truck
22 and boat, which he identified from photographs. He stated that be pays attention to boats more
23 closely than vehicles because he works on boats. Mr. Faria recalled being on Mr. Clinton's boat
24 that day and watching from the cockpit as the person who was putting the boat into the water at
2s the launch. That person appeared to be not very experienced because he seemed to be having
26 trouble. He looked at a photo of Scott and said he looked familiar but he could not say ifthat was
27 the person he saw on December 24 because he may have been familiar from having viewed Scott's
2a photos on the internet. Mr. Faria said that he did not recall seeing any object inside the aluminum

4
It
1 boat except some type of camouflage clothing, like a jacket or pants. Mr. Faria said .he recalled
2 the brown and green colors.
3 20. I know from the photos I reviewed that were taken by MPD during the search of
4 Scott's warehouse on December 26 and 27, 2002, that a camouflage jacket was found in his boat.
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18 21. Mr. Faria also stated that he spoke to Det. Owens from the Modesto Police
19 Department but the only question Det. Owens asked him was whether he saw Laci Peterson at the
20 marina on December 24. Mr. Faria stated that he did not see her at the marina. A copy of my
21 memorandum documenting my interview with Yuri Faria is attached hereto as Exh. E.
22 22. I remained in contact with Mr. Faria after I interviewed him because I believed his
23 eyewitness account and/or testimony could be important, if the police were to accuse Mr. Peterson
24 of being involved in the disappearance of hfa wife.
25 23. On September 15, 2004, while Mr. Peterson's trial was ongoing, Mr. Faria
26 contacted me via email stating that he had heard he may be needed to assist in the case. Mr. Faria
27 is not a native English speaker and his email reflects that, but I understood him to mean that he
2a would make himself available to testify at Mr. Peterson's trial if he was needed. I replied to Mr.

5
1 Faria via email that I would convey to Mr. Peterson's attorney, Mark Geragos, that he was
2 available if needed, and I would get back to him to let him know. Attached as Exh. F are the
3 emails Mr. Faria and I exchanged during Mr. Peterson's trial.
4 24. I conveyed to Mr. Geragos that Mr. Faria was available to testify, if needed, but
s Mr. Geragos never asked me to have Mr. Faria travel to San Mateo County so he could testify.
6 25. Based upon the statements of these witnesses and the receipts Scott provided, it
7 was obvious he was at the Berkeley Marina on December 24, 2002. And based on my interview
a with Yuri Faria and the proximity ofMr. Clinton's boat to the launch ramp, I concluded that there
9 was nothing large, like a body, inside Scott's boat that day. As shown in the photo below which
10 depicts the launch ramp and the location of Mr. Clinton's boat, circled in red, Scott had to drive
11 his boat right past Nick Clinton's boat, and Yuri stated that he was standing in the cockpit of Mr.
12 Clinton's boat, which was an elevated position, meaning he had good visibility looking down and
13 into Scott's boat.
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
SEARCH FOR LACI PETERSON
24
26. In addition to looking for witnesses who may have seen Scott at Berkeley Marina,
25
I was asked to assist in the search for Laci Peterson. I created a Missing Person flyer with Laci's
26
photo on it and my phone number. A copy of the flyer I created is attached as Exh. G. The
27
Petersons paid me directly for my services on occasion. A copy of one of the checks I received
28
DECLARATION Of GARY ERMOlAN

6
1 from Jackie Peterson, Scott' s mother, for payment of services investigating what happened to
2 Laci, dated March 17, 2003, is attached as Exh. H.
3 27. On January 8, 2003, I received a fax from Kirk McAllister's office stating that
4 Homer and Helen Maldonado had visited his office to report that they had seen a woman walking
s a dog on the comer of Covena and Miller Avenues on December 24, 2002, around l 0:00 a.m.
6• The message also stated that Mr. and Mrs. Maldonado had already given the information to MPD
7 officers at the command post that had been set up in the park.
8 28. On January 10, 2003, I interviewed Homer and Helen Maldonado. They related
g that on the morning of December 24, 2003, at approximately 9:50 to 10 a.m., they observed
1o someone fitting the description of Laci Peterson-a pregnant woman with dark hair walking a
11 golden retriever-walking near the intersection ofMiller and Covena Ave. Homer stated that he
12 called the Modesto Police Department on January 1, 2003, to report what he had seen and was
13 told a detective would contact him. Mr. Maldonado stated that he also reported what he had seen
14 to the Police Chaplain, but no one from MPD ever followed up on his report.
15 29. Homer further stated that immediately preceding seeing Laci, he had been at the
16 gas station on Miller Avenue and saw a tan colored van there. He described the man associated
17 with the van as a white male, in his late 40's or early 50's, about 150--155 pounds and "grubby"
18 looking.
19 30. On May 16, 2003, Homer Maldonado re-contacted my office indicating he had
20 further information to share. After viewing photos of Steven Todd and Glenn Pearce that were
21 published by the Modesto Bee, he recognized Todd as the driver of the tan van he had seen at the
22 gas station. He further recalled a second person being associated with the van as having asked
23 the driver if he "got the cigs" when the driver returned to the vehicle.
24 31. Homer Maldonado ex.pressed concern that the police did not believe the
25 information he was relating to them. He indicated that he had spoken to Vivian Mitchell, who
26 also reported to police that she saw Laci walking her dog on the morning of December 24, and
21 she expressed a similar concern, telling Mr. Maldonado that the police had tried to convince her
20 that the woman she saw was a blonde, and not a brunette like Laci. A copy of my memoranda

7
1 documenting my interviews with Mr. and Mrs. Maldonado and the receipts they provided me are
2 attached as Exh. I.
3 32. Based on the information Mr. and Mrs. Maldonado provided to me on January I 0,
4 I conducted a door-to-door canvas of residents on Covena Avenue near Miller Avenue. In doing
s so, I made contact with Martha Aguilar, who was visiting the Sevedra residence at 20 I Covena
6 Avenue. Mrs. Aguilar stated that she lived two doors down, at 215 Covena Avenue. Mrs. Aguilar
1 told me that she and her husband, Frank Aguilar, were driving down La Loma Avenue heading
8 west on December 24, 2002, around 10:30 to 10:45 a.m. and she saw a pregnant woman matching
9 the description of Laci Peterson walking a golden retriever dog, on La Loma Avenue, about one
10 block east of La Loma Park. She stated that she has seen photographs of Laci Peterson and is
11 certain that it was Mrs. Peterson she saw on the morning of December 24, 2002. She further
12 stated that she recognized Mrs. Peterson because she had seen her on a prior occasion at Gould
13 Medical Center. She also recalled seeing a flower tattoo on Mrs. Peterson's ankle, which Scott
14 confirmed to me was a tattoo his wife had. A copy of my memorandum documenting my
1s interview with Mrs. Aguilar is attached as Exh. J.
16 33. On January 18, 2003, Chris Rawley left a message on my office answering
17 machine reporting that his friend saw Laci walking her dog on December 24, 2002, in the La
10 Loma area. Mr. Rawley stated that his friend had called the police three times to report what he
19 had seen but no one had called him back. Mr. Rawley left contact information for his friend,
20 Tony Freitas.
21 34. On January 20, 2002, 1 contacted Tony Freitas and he stated that he is a Route
22 Driver for Orowheat Bread and his job was servicing restaurants. Mr. Freitas stated that on
23 December 24, 2002. he was at Perko's Restaurant on Yosemite Blvd making a delivery, and from
24 there he drove down Yosemite and turned northwest onto La Loma Avenue. Mr. Freitas said that
2s as he drove down La Loma, he saw Laci Peterson, whom he later recognized from the posters and
26 photographs. Mr. Freitas said that he recalled specifically that she was walking a golden retriever
21 type dog, that she was obviously pregnant, and, that she was wearing dark clothing. Mr. Freitas
20 said that he is not positive about the time; however, he believes that it was at least 9:45 a.m. Mr.

8
1 Freitas said that Laci was walking on the South side of the street, heading west toward town. Mr.
2 Freitas said that she was across the street from the triangular shaped grass/park like area, which
3 is close to the Miller Avenue intersection. A copy of my memorandum documenting my
4 interview with Mr. Freitas is attached as Exh. K.
5 35. On January 23, 2002, I met with Reverend Vern Deatherage of the Modesto
6 Gospel Mission, a mission that provided services for the homeless community in Modesto, to ask
7 him for his assistance in our search for Laci Peterson. Rev. Deatherage agreed to introduce me
a to his congregation and allow me to distribute Ute Missing Person flyer with Laci's photo on it
9 and our contact information. I followed up the next day with a letter to Rev. Deatherage thanking
10 him for his assistance. A copy of the letter I sent is attached as Exh. L.
11 36. On February 27, 2003, I contacted Vivian Mitchell, who reported that on
12 December 24, 2002, she saw Laci Peterson walking her dog on La Sombra Avenue, as Mrs.
13 Mitchell was looking out her kitchen window at around I0:00 to l 0:30 a.m. She stated that about
14 a week after she saw Laci, she called the police to report that she had seen Laci Peterson on
1s December 24, but the lady she !i-poke to at the Modesto Police Department did not seem interested
16 in what she had to say. A copy of my memorandum documenting my interview with Mrs.
17 Mitchell is attached as Exh. M.
18 37. On May 27, 2003. I contacted Grace Wolf, who reported to me that she saw Laci
19 Peterson walking her dog the morning ofDecember 24, 2002, on Encina Avenue. She recognized
2o Laci because she had seen her and Scott walking their dog in the past and had stopped and talked
21 on occasion. Ms. Wolf stated that when she saw the news coverage of Laci's disappearance, she
22 immediately told her family that she had seen Laci walking on December 24, but she was hesitant
23 about calling the police because they were discrediting anyone who claimed they saw Laci out
24 walking that day. A copy of my memorandum documenting my interview with ~s. Wolf is
2s attached as Exh. N.
26 38. I wao; informed that the locations all these witnesses-Maldonado, Freitas,
27 Aguilar, Mitchell, Wolf-reported seeing Laci walking the dog the morning ofDecember 24 were
2a consistent with the routes the Petersons would take when walking their dog in the La L-Oma
DECLARATlON OF GARY ERMOTAN

9
1 neighborhood. The times these witnesses reported seeing Laci were approximate times, but they
2 were all within the same general time frame: between 9:45 and 10:45 a.m. on December 24,
3 2002.
4 39. As a private investigator and former law enforcement officer who has interviewed
s thousands of witnesses over the course of my career, it was my assessment at the time and it
6 remains my view today that the witnesses I interviewed, described above, who reported seeing
7 Laci Peterson walking the Petersons' dog on December 24--Maldonado, Freitas, Aguilar,
8 Mitchell, Wolf-were credible witnesses who were attempting to provide helpful infonnation in
9 the search for Laci Peterson. These witnesses provided specific details about her appearance and
10 the times they saw her, to the best of their ability. None of those witnesses were interviewed by
11 the police prior to the arrest of Scott Peterson,.to my knowledge.
12 40. In April 2003, after Scott was arrested, I re~lized how important all these
13 eyewitness statements would be to Scott's defense. I was also aware that no one from law
14 enforcement had responded to the efforts these witnesses made to report what they had seen. No
1s one from law enforcement had assessed the credibility ofthese witnesses or the reliability of their
16 statements, prior to arresting Scott. To preseTVe these eyewitness statements before memories
17 began to fade, I contacted these witnesses and got their permission to video record their
18 statements. The video recorded statements are attached hereto on a USB drive as Exh. 0.
19 41. After Scott was arrested, 1 immediately assisted with the review of the police
20 reports that were provided to the defense. I came across a report by a witness named Leora Garcia
21 and interviewed her on August 29, 2003. She stated that on December 24, she was working as a
22 driving instructor, aud she recalled that during a lesson she had that began at 10:00 a.m. that
23 morning, she saw an older, reddish-orange dog with white around its face walking alone, with
24 reddish leash attached, near the intersection of Encina and Edgebrook Avenues. The dog fit the
2s description ofthe Petersons' dog and his leash. She stated that the dog looked like it knew where
26 it was going.
27 42. Ms. Garcia also stated that she then saw an older, light-colored van parked along
28 the curb by La Loma Park. It appeared to her that there had been some kind of a scuffle, the door

10
1 to the van was shut in a hurry, she saw some quilted material get caught in the door, and the van
2 squealed its tires and quickly pulled away, running through the stop sign and turning right towards
3 downtown. She said it gave her a bad feeling, so she made a comment to the driving student to
4 take down the license plate number. She recalled faded Texas plates with NGH4 included in the
s number. The van had solid sides, no windows, and she saw paint chipping. The rear windows
6 were tinted or mirrored. She stated that she thought it was a Chevy.
7 43. Ms. Garcia informed me that she told her family what she saw and watched the
a news that night to see if anything happened in that area. When she saw that Laci was missing she
9 wanted to call the police, but her husband told her not to because the description she had wasn't
1o very good. Later her friends told her to call the police, so she called Modesto Police Department
11 a week or two later. Ms. Garcia was told an officer would come to interview her but no one from
12 the police department had interviewed her as of August 29, 2003.
13 44. Ms. Garcia provided me with a copy of the page from her work calendar, which
14 reflects that she had an appointment at 10 a.m. with a student driver, as she stated. A copy ofmy
1s interview memorandum with Ms. Garcia and the page she provided from her calendar for
16 December 24, 2002, are attached hereto as Exh. P. T also videotaped my interview with Ms.
17 Garcia. It is attached hereto on a USB drive as Exh. 0.
18 45. Based on my decades-long career as an investigator who has considerable
19 experience interviewing witnesses and assessing credibility, it is my opinion that the witnesses
20 addressed above were credible and reliable witnesses. They appeared to me to be sincere in their
21 desire to provide helpful information to me, the police, and anyone else who was participating in
22 the search to find Laci Peterson.
23 MEDINA BURGLARY
24 46. 1broughout my investigation, many witnesses I interviewed expressed concerns
2s that the Modesto Police Department was not interested in investigating leads that didn't support
26 their theory of Scott's guilt. That was the case, as noted above, with witnesses who reported
27 seeing Laci alive on December 24, 2003, such as Homer Maldonado, Martha Aguilar, Tony
28
DECLARATION OF GARY ERMOlAN

II
1 Freitas, Vivian Mitchell, and Grace Wolf, but also with witnesses associated with the
2 investigation into the burglary of the Medina home.
3 47. On January 7, 2003, l contacted Susan Medina to interview her about the burglary
4 of her home located at 516 Covena Avenue, across the street from the Petersons' home. She
s stated to me that the police informed her the burglars were in her home for three hours, and that
6 the burglary occurred on December 26, 2002. Ms. Medina stated that she felt the police dismissed
7 the burglars as suspects in Mrs. Peterson's disappearance too quickly. A copy ofmy interview
a memorandum with Ms. Medina is attached hereto as Exh. Q.
9 48. On January 10, 2003, I contacted Robert Nickerson, who was at the Medinas'
10 home the morning ofDecember 24, 2002, inspecting a project in their back yard area. As he was
11 leaving, around 9:20 a.m., he stated that he was not certain but there was possibly a white Ford
12 van parked in front of his vehicle that he had to drive around. The van had two back doors, the
13 paint was chipping around the window, and he could see gray primer. He said the van had a crude
14 rack on top with wooden cross supports. Mr. Nickerson also stated that he saw a man ride by on
1s his bike heading north on Covena toward the park. He described that man as a white male, in his
16 40's, with tan sweats and windbreaker on a IO•speed bike. A copy ofmy interview memorandum
17 with Mr. Nickerson is attached hereto as Exh. R.
18 49. On January 16, 2002, I contacted Diane Jackson, who reported that on December
19 24, 2002 at 11:40 a.m., she saw a tan/beige van parked on the street in front of the Mcdina..c;' home
20 and three short, dark-skinned males standing near the van. Ms. Jackson stated that she reported
21 what she had seen to the police and the Modesto Police Department had scheduled her for
22 hypnosis the follo,ving day, in an attempt for her to remember more about what she saw. A copy
23 ofmy interview memorandum with Ms. Jackson is attached hereto as Exh. S.
24 50. On May I9, 2003, I contacted Superior Court Judge Ricardo Cordova, who lived
25 around the comer from the Petersons. He stated that on December 23, 2002, at approximately
26 10:15 p.m., someone knocked on his door. He was already in bed, and by the time he got to the
27 door he saw a man walking across his lawn. He went outside to confront the man, who he
28 described as in his late 30s, 5' IO", 170 pounds, with dirty blond hair. The man asked for money.

12
1 Judge Cordova stated that he sent the man away and felt the man was casing his home and possibJy
2 the neighborhood. Judge Cordova stated that another neighbor, Albert Urquidez, told him the
3 same guy who was casing Judge Cordova's home came to his door on December 23, 2002, and
4 said he was looking for his dog.
5 51. Judge Cordova stated that early on December 25, 2002, he spoke to Det. Sebron
6 Banks of the Modesto Police Department, whom he knew from prior cases he had worked on, and
7 explained the events that occurred then ight of December 23, 2002. Del Banks did not take any
a notes or write down Judge Cordova's statement. When Judge Cordova pointed out a pair of
9 women's sandals with a flower pattern he noticed lying alongside the road, three houses away
10 from the Petcrsons' home, Det. Banlcs showed no interest in the sandals and walked on.
11 52. The next day, on December 26, Judge Cordova saw Det. Ridenhour and repeated
12 what be had told Det. Banks. Det. Ridenhour told Judge Cordova to speak to a sergeant, which
13 he did. The following day, MPD Det. Reed went to Judge Cordova's home and he again
14 recounted what had happened with the man casing his home on December 23, 2002. Judge
15 Cordova stated that it was obvious there was no communication between the officers because Det.
16 Reed had no information about his prior reports.
17 53. Judge Cordova stated that he had met the Petersons at a community meeting
1a regarding issues in the neighborhood, and he recalled Scott and Laci saying that when they took
19 walks in the park and encountered homeless or transient people camping out, they would approach
20 them and tell them to leave. Judge Cordova said he thought this to be a bit bold and potentially
21 dangerous. He was concerned to think that Laci might be bold enough to confront someone like
22 this on her own. A copy of my interview memorandum with Judge Cordova is attached hereto as
23 Exh. T.
24 54. On May 27, 2003, I contacted Patty Ringler, who lived one block over from the
25 Petersons. She stated that early on the morning of December 25, 2002, at about 6:30 a.m., a
26 brown van stalled in front of her home and a woman got out of the van and came to Ms. Ringlcr's
27 door and said that she had mn out of gas. Ms. Ringler said that the woman reminded her of"drug
2a people." She stated that her husband gave the women some gas so they could drive on. In my

l3
1 handwritten notes, I wrote that Ms. Ringler commented that it was foggy that morning, but that
2 was not included in my typewritten report. A copy of my interview memorandum with Ms.
3 Ringler is attached hereto as Exh. U.
4 55. On June 14, 2003, I contacted Kathy Albert, who worked at the gas station where
s Homer Maldonado reported seeing two men in a van, one of whom Mr. Maldonado identified as
6 possibly Steven Todd, who confessed to committing the Medina burglary. Ms. Albert stated that
7 she observed a tan or cream-colored van hanging out in the parking lot of the gas station during
8 the month of December 2002. There were two males inside the van, the driver she described as
9 a Mexican male, 6' tall, large build, and short hair. The other man she described as white, medium
10 height, 135 pounds, and "scruffy" looking. She stated that she had to chase the men off for
11 loitering at least four times. Ms. Albert did not work on December 24, but she stated she saw the
12 van at the gas station on December 21 during her shift and did not see the van there again after
13 that. A copy ofmy interview memorandum with Ms. Albert is attached hereto as Exh. V.
14 56. Based on my experience as an investigator, my review of other tips and leads that
15 were called into the MPD regarding witnesses who reported seeing vans in and around the
16 neighborhood, and the information J received from the witnesses above concerning apparent
17 criminal activity that was occurring in and around the Petersons' neighborhood at the time Laci
18 Peterson disappeared, it was my view at the time-and it remains my view today-that the
19 Modesto Police Department did not conduct a thorough investigation into the Medina burglary.
2o There was no police investigation, to my knowledge, into whether other individuals participated
21 in that burglary in addition to Steven Todd and Glenn Pearce, nor was there any investigation into
22 the suspicious-looking vans that witnesses reported seeing on Covena and in the area on
23 December 24, to my knowledge.
24 DET. BROCCIDNI TARGETED SCOTT FROM DAY ONE
25 57. On January 16, 2003, J contacted Brian Ulrich, who stated that he was a good
26 friend of Scott and Laci Peterson. Mr. Ulrich stated that he was concerned that the detectives
21 investigating Laci's disappearance were intentionally lying to witnesses, including himself and
28 other of the Petersons' friends, to turn them against Scott Peterson. Mr. Ulrich stated that one
)t
14
1 detective told hi.rh they suspected Scott because he had refµsed to let the police into his home the
2 night Laci was discovered to be missing. Mr. Ulrich stated that he knew that was a He because
3 he was present at the Petersons' home that night and he witnessed Scott invite the. police into his
4 home and he observed the police going into the Petersons' home. Mr. Ullich also stated that the
s friends of Scott's who he had spoken to were all convinced Scott had nothing to do with Laci's
6 disappearance, but that after the detectives called them and spoke to them, they started to question
7 whether Scott may have had something to do with it A copy ofmy interview memorandum with
a Mr. Ulrich is attached hereto as Exh. W.
9 58. On October 21, 2003, l contacted Greg Reed, who stated that he never saw
10 anything that caused him to question Scott and Laci's relationship, he never saw Scott lose his
11 temper, and that when Scott left him a message at about 6:00 p.1)1. saying that Laci was missu1i,
12 his voice was cracking. Mr. Reed stated that he was present at the Petersons' home the night of
13 December 24, 2002, and at around t 1:00 p.m., he heard one of the officers on the scene make a
14 comment that caused Mr. Reed to believe the police thought Scott had done something to Laci.
1s Mr. Reed told me that he then got into the car with his wife and said to her, "They think he [Scott]
16 did it." Mr. Reed stated that he did not think the police were doing a very good job because it
17 appeared they were not communicating with one another about what was happening in the
1a investigation. A copy of my interview memorandum with Mr. Reed is attached hereto as Exh. X.
19 59. On November 10, 2003, r contacted Aaron fritz, who stated that he was a good
20 friend of Scott Peterson and had known him for 16 years. Mr. Fritz stated that Scott told him an
21 officer who was at the Petersons· home on December 24 told Scott he was sorry Det. Brocchini
22 was focused on him because when Brocchini gets his mind set on finding something he will make
23 sure he fi11ds it. Mr. Fritz also stated that Brocchini told him early on in the case, "f'm going to
24 get this guy," teferring to Scott. Mr. Fritz stated that there must be something definitely wrong
25 when another member of the police department is apologizing for Brocchini's behavior. A copy
26 of my interview memorandum with Mr. Fritz is attached hereto as Exh. Y.
27 60. lt was my view when this case was b~ing investigated by the Modesto Police
2a Depa1irnent, and it remains my view today, that the police immediately determined that Scott

15
1 Peterson was guilty of killing his wife and set out to colJect evidence that would support that
2 theory, ignoring other leads and evidence that pointed to other suspects.
3 61. I provided Mr. Peterson's attorneys with all the witness interview memoranda and
4 videotaped interviews I had gathered as part ofmy investigation.
5 62. Prior to Scott's arrest in April 2003, r had no knowledge that a Croton watch had
6 been pawned at The Pawn Shop by a woman named Deanna Renfro on December 31, 2002. l
7 did not conduct any interviews with Deanna Renfro or James Broyer prior to Scott's arrest or at
a any other time.
9 I have reviewed this declaration in its entirety, and it is accurate to the best of my
11 the foregoing is true and correct.
12
13
~~
14
15
16 Date Gary Ennoian

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

16
EXHIBIT A
INVESTIGATIVE REPORT
RE: PETERSON
1-7-2003 Contact was made with Mr. Mike Ilvesta (1791 Capistrano Berkley, CA
94707 510-559-9121 or cell 510-334-2078). Mr. Ilvesta is employed by the City of
Berkley and works at the Marina.
Mr. Ilvestra stated that he was at the Berkley Marina on December 24, 2002 and
he recalls seeing Scott Peterson and his Ford pick up with trailer. Mr. Ilvestra was
able to identify Mr. Peterson's vehicle by the photographs that have been
circulating at the Marina.
Mr. Ilvestra stated that as he was driving through the parking area near the launch,
he had to stop while Mr. Peterson was backing his trailer down the launch to pick
up his boat. Mr. llvestra explained that ifthere are other vehicles with trailers
parked in the parking area, (as there was that day) and someone is backing down
the launch at the same time, a vehicle couldn't pass through the area at the same
time.
Mr. Ilvestra said that while Mr. Peterson was backing his trailer down the launch,
it appeared that he was having a bit of trouble turning and backing the trailer. Mr.
Ilvestra said that after Mr. Peterson backed the trailer down the launch, he was
able to pass, however waited a bit to see Mr. Peterson's face. Mr. Ilvestra
explained that he did not want him to think that he was trying to rush him. Mr.
Ilvestra said that he saw Mr. Peterson smile, and then he drove on by.
Mr. Ilvestra said that he believes the time was about 12:40 P.M., however he is not
sure on the time. Mr. Ilvestra said that what stood out in recognizing the truck was
the size difference between the big truck and the small trailer. Mr. Ilvestra said
that he usually sees much bigger boats at the Marina. Mr. Ilvestra said that the
green box in the back of the pick up bed also stood out.
Mr. Ilvestra stated that he spoke with Detective Rick Armendarias about what he
saw.
Mr. Ilvestra said that he heard that there are possibly some additional witnesses
who also saw Mr. Peterson on December 24, 2002 at the Marina. Mr. Ilvestra said
that an individual by the name of "Doug", who lives on a houseboat at the Marina
may have saw Mr. Peterson. Mr. Ilvestra said that he would attempt to find out the
contact information on "Doug" and phone back.
Mr. Ilvestra had no further information.

EXHIBIT B
lNVESTIGATJVE REPORT
RE: PETERSON
1-7-2003 Contact was made wilh David Johnson (P.O. Box 428 Carmichael. CA
9 16-369-8922 or 916-821-8922-cell). Mr. Johnson said Lhat he has a boat that is
docked at the Berkley Marina and he has been staying on the boat through the
holidays while he is doing some work on the boat.
Mr. Johnson confirmed that he wus at the Marina on December 24, 2002, and he
recalled seeing Mr. Peterson's pickup and trailer parked in the parking lot near the
launch.
Mr. Johnson explained that he walked to the shower about mid-day on December
24, 2002. He said that he was expecting some company later on. Mr. Johnson said
while leaving the shower, he recalled seeing Mr. Peterson's Ford Pickup and
trailer parked in the parking area near the launch. Mr. Johnson said that he saw the
photographs of Mr. Peterson's lruck on the website and also on the flyers that have
been circulating. Mr. Johnson said that he is certain that this is the same vehicle he
saw on December 24, 2002.
Mr. Johnson said that he specifically recalled seeing the green colored " Greenly"
toolbox in the back of Mr. Peterson' s pick up. Mr. Johnson said that he is a
contractor, so he is familiar with Greenly brand tools. Mr. Johnson said that he
also recalled looking at the truck and noticing what a " nice". "cherry" pick up it
was.
Mr. Johnson said that last Friday he heard on the news that the Modesto Police
were looking for people to confirm that they saw Mr. Peterson or his vehicle at the
Berkley Marina. Mr. Johnson said that he telephoned the Modesto Police on
Friday night, Saturday and Monday, trying to give a statement. Mr. Johnson said
Lhat he was finally able to get in touch with Detective Grogan after calling a third
time.
Mr. Johnson said that he was ·'ticked on•· at the police because they did not make
any effort to talk to the people who stay at the Marina, to confirm the information
about Mr. Peterson being there.
Mr. Johnson stated that there are a few people
people who were around that same day,
day,
and he would compile
compile a list of names and fax it to my
my office.
ofce.
No further information.
[NVESTIGATlVE REPORT
RE:PETERSON
\-9-2003 Additional contact was ma<le with Mr. David Johnson at the Berkley
Marina.
Mr. Johnson was able to supply a drawing of the marina area near the launch that
Scott Peterson used on December 24, 2002. Mr. Johnson included the names of
residents who have their boats docked in the marina, who he believed could be
potential witnesses in this matter.
Mr. Johnson stated that it would be impossible for anyone to conceal a large object
in a small, open aluminum boat such as Mr. Peterson's boat. Mr. Johnson
explained that after launching, the boat would have had to pass by all of the
docked boats in the area, which were inhabited by residents at that time.
See attached copies of drawings supplied by Mr. Johnson.

,_ .. A ft A ftf t .
Jan 0 8 03 ll : 03a
BERKLEY NAR INE CENTER 5 108438197
-···· ... .
I- ~c)O • s-....,~.... -.1/- 7-,~
,4
PAG'cS J1,..JC1..,vD10 5 TE-lcs c~ve~ $1-!EE-r'
, ·- .. ·-·· ..
--- ----- ...... . .. . .
....----·
.......
N ~-c;.s OF P~Pu= --t S CHt2,-t •>--1""1 c.. or:: Pv/$1,.1<:..::.

l,Prva.>CM (1..-,..vv,.,p t \Ice.., r-J11'v . AL/20 1 ,i. eop.;, o~ 7J-/£se:
1
"re .vP'-€' 5 l- I K-€:L.. ...-,,
tf{t2.0:Jt;.1-!
A}Pt' !t}~Vlt' ~·t

'&A.7 LA;;;~,_, 1,~~~~-·
::1;t'..'f;J.):·.~·,.~t
c
rcx:"'('- 7R,I t:',~i c., Pr'?r(itl!.AJS Af<or.,1-•I)
WA 1.-K~·~
~ M.•:r. ,41..//' c>'Tl--led, A~E' A,Jo ·,-
t \..·
()/<..
o~ s trt.:·~
/ µ~.e, v:--<rr.' ,~c,~: i:

A-s '77-''ZRI:-' /J.•c:-, ~: ,··
J'Jo, J:,t~1,..:v ,-: ... -~ -- ..,- ,-1w·
• •.,!
}.£:~:-_- - .--.:-~•-;-· .:-:,:1. .../ 8~,µ~S tr '-vA-5 C1-1tt,~-r-A-~ fJ!!-J e:_ /1'Jf>_
J,rv-r t-d:t:>.1' tv,:='A111~
BERKLEY NARINE CENTER 5108438197
'
/)11;1-Jr
, - Y Ar
e,p .t:,~,. '/;/41,J) - C:,C.tt'A-St~Al1t<,,,_ '>" 'SEE" HIM ~
~~t,
,.;c, -r,.1-A. o vGl'f 1,-.Ai.> tJ'-H ~ A f.A. P AA"- ,
: rt;, L'-(1,.) a·"'- IC..K-ee- - I'
7's,, ~ -oz () . .
•~. <j' '3/14'
( (»A.J 5 7""~ ev - OIJ ~ ,, DtJcJ<. A,..,o ~,<.,..,,,. M.-.. ' -::;;,~~"" ')¥ .....,.,,.,.., P. " ·
~ N f : i~f' ~
"'A,
s,-~ DAY "' ' ,;,..,e ,,,,.,,._._ -r., .......,_ 1/~.1,
~ ~ :t,"'"- -,a, "rn - .... ...,
' ' ~'l"WP-"5
:J' /b>I ~ 'A.f--

r,.,t 1-r/fJ • -roi.c 1K .,,,_, '11111-r .......
f -~- (;I,,'( {2<:r.,,u, //:"'~-- ,) , - /IJ
~~
,t ij •
.JD~_.·-· , - W It S A.a.t:JvJJO A~e~
I
~ -ro"'D k€ lie: 2)10uT ~~ AtJ"t-n,,t~ & ,
t'\k1)0
- Jen oe oa 11:03e BERKLEY NARINE CENTER 6108438197 p.3
..:fit-1 8GAJ0£:11- . -
(2)
--ro {,,,O 1-1,f HE WD,ri (:>IJ1" (>..) A
l1.
c/ESSE-&.. M~ts-r
"
- - - • - • • ♦o o
r Stoi e,12 - S'lt7 ~ew.)

' / I> C/r,_ '- o,..l -::;. " ~ e -::z: C>O "· M • (H,..s. 0c s,,,.,_,UI
12€-e o l(l._()) , 7or- r) ;.&.\..(:- r i · /'4~--r-r.., ;.~•:•:x:;,,f Htf S
P.:,1,. I f,J O~c. "-,....J A,J() &r1£'5 /)(I( F.&7"(.. y 'u, /3ttPn-
WHc,o ~ G ' j f ~- H~ , s oA..J "o II D:.> c 1t:. , vr-s~z... _
jp~l.f.f fbowr I~ OtJ t;ND-Tre o,:: ")t" Cbe,c::. ,
~V'-'t,,nf//Jv.le
[l.fts IS l~f:'M'Y l'kvGI-( IT ~ ~c.~ Ar JJ1AAt.l~A- i ~~y~

I I
OTIH:K Tfnt,..J M(K.~ /ll/et;1"A ~D CH1P1) w,-,,, A,(£ C!,t,y o,:
~l.-e--t €"""PCPYee.s w..+,c.K De-r~-r.~ /IJT~lf,&:._,~ {'Aue:, AIJ~ 811.0
~ k'1~ei.F 45Pt>~ 'Vf-.H O,-.J V 7/t> 3) f I [:b,-.,7 f2..t;;CA-L-<.. !r.,..Jyc,..J£.
t:1,St. -'(#It'(" Ut.J'-0 /flfve, {3f:r:A.J~r::vJ.J0 /r,Jl)-rfl~RE 3"vs, WCA~

1
J.JrrT --,1113 W/rr..«.e;;,_s 0/JE V.SuA-u_Y ~€e$ nto~p tvl/o WOc}c..() 8~
o/ffl.h.J~,,,_s -r.. ~~ ,'f))y~,.
l /fo/Je '11,t5 tv,u.. Het-,p /,J SOM (; tv"Y,e,fl!c1A,c.V t!tVE"~ !Ac.,

-r,11c:.;q;, f''(c:,{)c,.f. W~<i: A-c..c... (>v(Z,J,.f..De,1<,cr., tlJ 111-E 10rne:-l'm. ''
/IJ..XS1tr;A-r,e,,.JI h->t> I f:1~(;1)..~ T 7?fl'ff' :;i. t-vt.i;.'t=<:S Jllfvr:, htE-t..7eD
Irv-> ~'1 /t:t,,o,,)f:, W!iH ~€°M Fttt£~ or- Pll1(.r,c1.,1t.,.A-"-.. 7l/Q.)6S 7wrr
fJt (fAff1 BE t?r ~~.,-/(.~ /1t,,r,~lf>/Lr;i1"'1~ •
/F r~e /S ~71-{(~t, ¼"'-C' I C,,t,..I f:)t.) 7if1r-r Wic...... ;K~1rr

YN /µ ~UJ,.taJ,J., --,1(1,Jt:,S / ~~~ ~ {Af-!,,t-, ,
-
.
. Pm${
25'» 53$. yEaém.
_|!.lii
.l. ..
p.4
.i
..l Arr-u. AN..."

x;
a m
-
0
I}
i
g
3-
[9‘0
n(], 1 I
_.
n.—
wmws
.._
Ema/am ..z..
Wavy '55 9pm

5108438197
5108433137
J-e‘c’ma.
- • """"\.1
~
a:
'1}
_
“kw-2:;
LU
‘
\ 0
1
U
.
J
11?
'r
--
‘3
>3:
:‘i‘O
I
'C
m.
-
.l I...
..I.rll.
w
.w
\
NARINE CENTER
.\
CENTER
I. .
3)! \x
/\ :3. - - i: i... PI. .5. .. Qt n
RERKLEY NHRINE
Ht}? IMHQQW HJJ&w\V mu . EL \\.

.3399... .\\\.H
$_ Mira...
.
.1
.
w .
a
u
.334“... Gav“... +u.
.
.4317?
BERKLEV
I “ii:
.
.
I .
. . x. .
‘ ..u.:
.
(1.. __..
\. . .. s
J I
. :1... \mm ._
. . .. .
Ill...
m
....
X x... alw.
.
.....u
r. . I. .§ .D ._ . . ..
. . \‘
.
_\
\\.\ .3:J \m.
.
.
nun...
praulw u. - ‘57.... A.
V
-_.
”HI. -H “3.4.3.1434“. :u
i I
'. i
..:-. - a
_.
. .. H. ..
.....J
.1!
-wwmx.
. 1‘
.1 Anitdjwztxl
R
OB 03 11:04•
11:04.
.
_
.
_ .
vslanntw
1L” . ..\Au$u‘\ .tI. _ .
M
\\lllvr
~
A .
1/1. / Militia].
.
$23
I.
1
AWvBMMWAl
.
..\.. . . .
.
nun!!! uY“23......
.
x /
EgW
_
1%.: ..
ggu
.
m
a
Jan 08
«.«éi .:
«9%
.Jan
«ulelc H,
C
—
.mn.uw. . m
hf.rll..
«Sigmaivgi
m
A
x.
1:
..._\.I..I rl\ _...
_
Jan OB
Jan on 03 Inn-u
ua 11:04a naaxLav um": csman
BERKLEY NARINE CENTER 510943319?
5108438197 P-S
p.5
: \
I I ' •
~ ,,a,,
~o(l . ? ,,
I \
;
a.
L .. , j y‘- 0
“a:
#91 alum
-
$-
.10
z
omxmajoad .,
-"
Lu
noo- F—i i
f ‘I ‘:~
a 'l'
‘
_'
.
_ 3|
‘ ' '_ i :5
I "I
I
‘
\I .JK'.‘ H. u—L
mm“ as: W'lw
were
w mm m:
75 arming!
Ex;
é
LL
EXHIBIT C
.INVESTIGATIVE REPORT
RE: PETERSON
1-9-2003 Contact was made with Dave Casey, who works at the Berkley Marina
(One Spinnaker Way Berkley, CA (415) 518-3914-home).
Mr. Casey said that he has been repairing boats for over 30 years at that location.
Mr. Casey stated that he was there on December 24, 2002, however he did not
reca11 seeing Mr. Peterson, his vehicle or boat.
Mr. Casey stated that this is the season to fish for Sturgeon. He said that it is not
unusual at all to see boats the size of Mr. Peterson's in the bay fishing for
Sturgeon. Mr. Casey said that this size boat is actua11y the boat of choice for
people who fish for Sturgeon.
Mr. Casey continued to say that the bay is actuaJly calmer this time of year and
less treacherous than the delta.
Mr. Casey had no further information.

EXHIBIT D
RE: PETERSON
1·9-2003 Contact was made with Nicholas "Nick" Clinton (1672 Oxford Berkley,
CA (510) 502-890 1). Mr. Clinton's boat is docked at the Berkley Marina, near the
public launch.
Mr. Clinton confirmed that he was at the Marina on December 24, 2002. Mr.
Clinton explained that he was working on his engine most of the morning with
Yuri Faria. He said that after the repairs were made; he and Mr. Faria sailed to San
Francisco. Mr. Clinton said that he believes that they left at approximately 12:00
P.M.
Mr. Clinton stated that he did recall one small vessel going out from the public
launch, and he does recall seeing a truck and trailer in the parking lot that day.
After looking at the photographs of Mr. Peterson's truck and boat, he could not
say that it was the same boat or truck that he saw on December 24, 2002.
Mr. Clinton said that Mr. Faria might have had a better opportunity to see Mr.
Peterson because he was standing in the cockpit while Mr. Clinton was down in
the cabin working on the engine.
EXHIBIT E
RE: PETERSON
1-9-2003 Contact was made with Yuri Faria at 2617 Dana Berkley, CA. Mr. Faria
was doing some work at a friend's home. Mr. Faria lives on his boat at the Berkley
Marina (510-846-3 814).
Mr. Faria confirmed that he was at the marina on December 24, 2002. Mr. Faria
said that he and Mr. Clinton were going to go sailing to San Francisco that
morning, however Mr. Clinton was having some engine trouble so they had to
work on the engine.
Mr. Faria stated that sometime around 10:00 A.M. he drove his bicycle to the store
to purchase some cookies for breakfast. Mr. Faria said that when he retuned, he
recalled seeing an aluminum boat at the launch area. Mr. Faria viewed the
photographs of Mr. Peterson's truck and boat and said that the boat that he
remembered seeing at the launch area appeared to be the same boat as depicted in
the photograph. Mr. Faria said that he pays attention to boats more closely than
vehicles because he works on boats.
Mr. Faria said that he recalled watching the boat being put in the water from the
cockpit of Mr. Clinton's boat. Mr. Faria said that it appeared that the person
launching the boat was not very experienced because he seemed to be having
trouble. Mr. Faria viewed a photograph of Mr. Peterson. Mr. Faria said that Mr.
Peterson looked familiar, however he could not say that he recognized Mr.
Peterson from being with the boat at the launch on December 24, 2002, or Mr.
Peterson looked familiar because he viewed photographs on the Internet.
Mr. Faria stated that he did not recall seeing any object inside the aluminum boat
he observed. Mr. Faria did say that he recalled seeing some type of camouflage
clothing, like a jacket or pants. He said that he recalled the brown and green
colors.
Mr. Faria said that when he talked to Detective Owens from the Modesto Police,
he was not asked anything about the boat. Mr. Faria said that he was only asked to
picture of Laci Peterson and he was asked if he saw her at the marina on
look at a picture
December 24,24, 2002.
Mr. Faria said that he did not see Mrs. Peterson at any
any time at the Marina.
EXHIBIT F
- - -.. Page 1 of 3
Garv Ermoian
From: ''yuri faria" <[email protected]>

To: "Gary Ennoian" <glepi@sonnetcom>
Sent: Friday, September 17, 2004 11:59 AM
Subject: Re: yuri faria
Sounds great,
I'm in Puerto Vallarta, waiting the end of the

hurracane seasson. I have a eel. phone here: 044 322
1178151
Sometimes works, because not always I have batery
charge, and specially credits.
Have a good one, send me a word about if you commimng.
Best wishes,
Yuri
-- Gary Ermoian < [email protected]> wrote:
> Yuri:
>
> Mexico-that's great It is beautiful down there! In
> fact I am going on
> vacation to Mexico in October..I'll be in Puerto
> Vallarta, Mazatlan, and
> Caho San Lucas. If you are in one of those areas I'd
> be happy to take you to
> lunch!
>
> I still have not heard back from Mr. Geragos. I know
> he is very busy right
> now with the trial. I will send you an e-mail as
> soon as I hear from him.
>
> Best Wishes,
>
> Gary.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "yuri faria" <yurifaria@yM,oo.com>
> To: "Gary Ennoian" <~ s onnet.com>
> Sent: Thursday, September 16, 2004 9:43 AM
> Subject: Re: yuri faria
>
>
>> Ok Gary,
>>
> > I'm in Mexico, heading to South America.
> > Any way, I still checking my mails.
> > Thanks for your wishes.
9/29/2004
- Page 2 of 3
-
;,, > J hope everithing running well with you and yours.
;::,, > Sincerely,
::>>
I
> > Yuri Faria
>>
> > --- Gary Ermoian <gleP-i.~nne ..£QID> wrote:
>>
> > > Dear Yuri:
>>>
> > > Thank you for contacting me.
>>>
> > > It is possible that Scott may need your help. As
>you
> > > know, they are in trial
>>> now.
>>>
> > > Are you still in San Diego?
>>>
>>> I will contact the attorney, Mr. Geragos, and
> ask
> > > him if he needs to talk to
> > > you. I will then e-mail you back to let you
> know.
>>>
> > > Thank you for all of your help.
>>>
> > > I hope all is going well for you!.
>>>
>>> Gary.
>>>
> > > GARY L. ERMOIAN, CPI
>>> GARY L. ERMOIAN, INVESTIGATIONS
>>> CA STATE LICENSE PI 8855
>>> P.O. BOX 5052 MODESTO, CA 95352-5052
> > > (209) 521-9327 OR 1-800-575- ISP Y
> > > FAX: (209) 572-3059
> > > www.ennoian.com
>>>
> > > ---- Original Message ----
> > > From: "yuri faria" <[email protected]>
> > > To: <[email protected]>
>>> Sent: Wednesday, September 15, 2004 4:28 PM
>>> Subject: yuri faria
>>>
>>>
>>>> Gary,
>>>>
> > > > A friend of mine told me recently he saw at
>some
> > > > magazine the lower of Scott needs my help with
>>> some
Page 3 of 3
> > > depoiment. Is th.is true?

; > > > 1 rstill checking my email, please send me a
>word
>>> if
>>>> you need my help.
>>>>
>>>> Sincerely,
>>>>
> > > > Yuri Faria
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _ _ _ _~ ~ - -- - - - -
>>>> Do you Yahoo!?
> > > > Declare Yourself - Register online to vote
> today!
> > > > http://vote.yahoo.com
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
--------------------
>> Do You Yahoo!?
> > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
> protection around
> > htt.p://mail.yahoo.com
>>
>
>
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail is new and improved- Check it out!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
9/29/2004
EXHIBIT G
GARY L. ERMOIAN, INVESTIGATIONS._______~P.O:;.:..:
. BO;,::;X~5052~
Coifomlo State license • Pl 8855 Modesto, CA 95352
(209) 521-9327
1-800676-ISPV
Fox: ('1!11) 572-3059
www.ermoion.com
WE ARE ASKING FOR YOUR ASSISTANCE!
Laci Peterson was last seen in the La Loma Area, Modesto, CA on

December 24, 2002 sometime during the hour of9:30 A.M., while
she was walking her Golden Retriever Dog. At the time she
disappeared, Laci was 8 months pregnant. Her due date is on or
about February 10, 2003.
We are asking for your help with any information you may have
regarding Laci's disappearance. Even if you have previously given
infonnation to the police hot line, the press, or anyone else, we
would still like to hear from you. Please call toll free from any
telephone 1-800-575-4779 and ask for Gary or Loretta. All calls
will remain confidential.
We sincerely thank you for your help I
Laci Peterson
EXHIBIT H
Gary L. Ermoi.an Investigations
P.O. Box 5052
Moda•to, ca 95352
cali !ornia State LiceruJe I PI8855
Telephone (209)521- 9327
Invoice submitted to:

Kirk W. McAllister, Esq .
McAllister ~ McAllister
1012 11th Stree t, Suite 100
Modesto C]i.. 95354
March 3, 2003
In Reference To :PETERSON, Scott

Invoice # 10922
Professional services
Hrs/Rate .Amount
2/ 14/03 INVESTIGJ-.TION FRCX~ 2- 14-2003 TO 10 . 00 600 . 00

3 - 3- 2003 60.00/hr
For pro:essional services rendered 10.00 $600 . 00
Previous balance $4 ,135 .97

2/5/03 Payment - thank you (53,270. 9 7 )
2/18/03 Payment - thank you ($1,000 . 00 )
Total paymencs (54 ,270 .97 )
Balance due $465.00
e.:.lling due and payable on rece ipt. Payment in full must be made
w.:.thin 15 days othe n1ise a minimum ser·1ice charge of $15 . 00 per
month w:11 be assessed to this account .
We gladl'.f accept V:SA 11.l-.STERCARD Jil-1ERICAN EXPRESS for payment. Thank

you!
_
.
..
_
H_
Mm
Vigor. 57.513
Maxim a“ '
1:fgaff
i
".
l.
9..
ta
W’W’g @o 7J‘5u5‘3.
1
I •
--
-
..::
=
mm nII!IlllI!“"llllllllll'lllilulIIlllll'lll’l'lll'lnllln
l_
Way/m
M7"
94,7,
“429*?!
l
W31
i
auuanb???
'I
I
(W‘
_..,,,,w 0
WW!
.éQWWYWVVWWbWZI/Tlg;lw;
CE]
llii
lQ
E
“War
½
~
~
·a
-~
-~ ,Cl
mé v0 aovaa vanes
I
'
,.·
"mm'wm w '
I :i
sane-mamaand
•
i
-
Ta 3 5 “983394 3Nl1399'
t ,~
I
" " ' _ .
..,
“_"' iéi‘l-l—Y-v‘ —‘-G-' '.*r“——"... "Ax-a- -.‘..___ "-n. u. u.-
,--..—....... .- .-,...
tl
r,
-_;'.s
,,
i,
“HM“
I
'
i,'
EXHIBITII
EXHIBIT
RE: PETERSON
l-10-2003 Contact was made with Homer and Helen Maldonado at their residence
(207 Phoenix Ave. Modesto, CA 95354 (209) 544-1030).
Mr. Maldonado stated that he saw Laci Peterson at approximately 9:50 A.M. to
10:00 A.M. on December 24, 2002.
Mr. Maldonado explained that he and his wife drove to the USA Mini-Mart Gas
Station on Miller Avenue, near the comer of Covena and Miller. Mr. Maldonado
said that after they left the gas station, the drove West on Miller past Covena
Avenue. Mr. Maldonado said that he observed a beautiful young woman who he
described as being "very pregnant" with a golden retriever dog. Mr. Maldonado
said that it appeared that she was having trouble with the dog, as the dog's front
legs were up like he was jumping up on her. Mr. Maldonado said that he
commented to his wife, asking her if she saw the pregnant woman having trouble
with her dog. Mr. Maldonado said that his w ife said to him, "I hope she doesn't
fall".
Mr. Maldonado said that he recalls that the woman was dressed in dark pants and a
light top. He said that she had dark hair. Mr. Maldonado said that she was located
about the second house from the comer from Miller Ave., and she was on the
West side of the street. Mr. Maldonado said that he has seen photographs of Laci
Peterson and is sure that the person he saw with the dog was Laci Peterson.
Mr. Maldonado stated that as he continued to drive, he recalled looking in the rear
view mirror to see if she crossed over Miller Ave., however he did not see her.
Mr. Maldonado said that he and his wife then drove to his co-worker's home on
Grape and dropped off a Christmas gift. Mr. Maldonado said that they then went
to Save Mart, and then Longs. Mr. Maldonado supplied to receipts, one from Save
Mart which indicated a date of 12/24/02 and time of 11 :33 A.M. and one from
Longs which indicated a date of 12/24/02 and time of 12:06 P.M. Mr. Maldonado
said that they were Save Mart for quite a while because the store was very busy.
Mr. Maldonado said that he telephoned the Modesto Police on January 1, 2003 to
report this information. Mr. Maldonado said that he did not receive a call back, so
he went to the command post to report the matter. Mr. Maldonado said that he was
told a detective would talk to him, however no one has ever followed up. Mr.
Maldonado said that he also told this same story to the Police Chaplain.
Mr. Maldonado said that he did not recall seeing any other people or vehicle near
Laci when be saw her. Mr. Maldonado did say that when he was getting gas at the
USA Station, he observed an older tan colored van, with some yellow, parked at
the station, also getting gas. Mr. Maldonado continued to say that the driver was a
"grubby" looking white male, late 40's early 50's, 5' 8", 150 to 155 lbs.
Mr. Maldonado said that he would assist if needed further.

RE: PETERSON
5-16-2003 A follow up interview was conducted with Mr. Homer Maldonado at

his residence (207 Phoenix Ave. Modesto, CA 209-544-1030). Mr. Maldonado
had telephoned my office indicating that he had some additional information
regarding the Peterson case.
Mr. Maldonado stated that recently the Modesto Bee published the photographs of
Steven Todd and Donald Pearce. Mr. Maldonado said that when he looked at the
photograph of Steven Todd, he recognized him as the person who was associated
with the tan colored van he saw at the USA Gas Station on Miller Avenue, just
prior to his sighting of Laci Peterson on 12/24/2002.
Mr. Maldonado continued to say that Todd was exiting from the store and
someone from the van asked him "Got the ciggs?" Mr. Maldonado said that he did
not know if Todd was driving the van, or ifhe just got into the van.
Mr. Maldonado said that the van was not getting gasoline. Mr. Maldonado said
that he recalled that the van was tan colored with some yellow. He said that he
recalled that there was a ladder in the back and also a spare tire cover or holder.
Mr. Maldonado said that he remembered that the van had white curtains covering
the windows of the rear portions of the van.
Mr. Maldonado said that he believes that the van drove around the store as it
exited. Mr. Maldonado said that he did not see which way the van went, however.
Mr. Maldonado said that he and his wife exited onto Miller and this is when they
saw Laci Peterson and her dog.
Mr. Maldonado expressed concern about the police not believing the information
he relayed to them. He also said that he spoke with Vivian Mitchell, who told him
that the police tried to tel) her that she saw a blonde lady and not a woman with
brown hair that matched the description of Laci Peterson. Mr. Maldonado said that
Mrs. Mitchell would not change her story, however.
1006
LONGS DRUGS
SCENIC PLACE - HODESTO
10 8270 5◄3 002

S AVE MART
UPERMARKETS
ATC A/F RADIO BOOK 1T 6 . 99 801 OAKDALE RO.

ATC A/F RADIO BOOH 1T 6. 99 MOO~STO, CA 95355
R11ghiter 610 Tran: 95
UNITED HODEL 5 .99 1T 5. 99 Cash I wr 11J24 12/, '4
SIHBA EVI DOLL 1T 2 .99 SALE
1T 1 . 99 SALE A$$J j flNG YOU WITH
FIESTA HONKEV WANOA
PRIHA RCK HORSE 1T 19 . 99
DISCOUNT so.or 10 . 00- ·:~ 11:f
."'··- . -·
CHEESE , ..
- ' "'"t ; rcAl<E l).~9i
PRIHA RCK ..llRSE 1T 19 . 99 , 11
9.99 f
10 . 00- i<Ol1in L SLVS
DISCOUrH SO . OT j
i 3/ 9.99 T
SUB TO rAL ◄◄ .93 1.69 f
l [ll1111ER ROI l ii
1 [JHU1t:il ROLLS 1.6~ f
~.99 i
7 . 375 t TAX 3. 31 l P:J►lf'i<IN r-IE
1 f~t~ SSf l[IZ lh 1.99 ;
◄8 . 2◄
TOTAL
26 lt c:as S.,o-total $ 85 .''
◄ 8 . 24 CHANGE . 00 Tax S 1.l,
DEBIT Tot•1 S 87.34
. A~ttf Lt~TlflLAlf •• 40 .00
-------------------------------------- C,rtlf1catt t12010
ft~AIO &, utdIT 47 .34
LONGS DRUGS STORE ft
OEblT f.dr~ • •••••••••••ft4312

801 OAKDALE ROAD RH ti () 100861
HODESTO CA 95355· ◄ 576 APPROVAL: 011426 AUTO
XXXXXXXXXXXY.4312 12/2003 PAD OATE: 12/24/ 02 Tlkf: 11:33:10
PAYHENT FROH PRIHARY
12/24/2002 12 :06 .00
SEQI : 577 AUTH:
RESP : 00 MS: ,.({. 19
DB I
00 APPROVED · fl c,. t , vii h. C..> Oil So•,I ll!IS ~ $ l. 9-? •
AMOUNT : I 48.24
002 00001006 8270 TO IA L , , :VINGS $3.78
0543
--·- --- --- --· ·---·-·-
---------- - ----
THANK YOU FOW SHOPPING Al LONGS
Ltvt health~ L1vt happy . Live Lon95 , ,·0111 c,ur Sa 1•e Mart fa•d I _, I
To Ou, fo111 1 IJ uf I.Ol•dl t:~stota, rs
DECEHBER 24 , 2002 IZ :0 6 PH Hav& a $1 fa , Haµp:: Holl~;: $.;asor,
J
EXHIBIT J
RE: PETERSON
1-10-2002 While fo llowing up door to door with residents on Covena Avenue,

near Miller Ave., contact was made with Martha Aguilar at the Sevedra residence
at 20 1 Covena.
Martha Aguilar lives 2 doors down (215 Covena Ave. Modesto, CA 522-9648 ),
and just happed to be visiting Clara and Martin Sevedra at the time of my arrival.
Mrs. Aguilar stated that she and her husband were driving down La Loma Ave.,
going toward down town on December 24, 2002 at approximately 10:30 A.M. to
10:45 A.M. Mrs. Aguilar said that she observed a pregnant woman, matching the
description of Laci Peterson walking a golden retriever dog, on La Loma Avenue,
about l block East of La Loma Park. Mrs. Aguilar said that the first thing she
noticed was that the woman was pregnant, and then she noticed that she was not
wearing a coat or jacket and it was cold outside.
Mrs. Aguilar said that she has seen photographs of Laci Peterson and is certain
that it was Mrs. Peterson she saw on the morning of December 24, 2002. Mrs.
Aguilar said that she recogn ized Mrs. Peterson because she had previously seen
her at Gould Medical Center. Mrs. Aguilar said that she also recalled seeing the
flower tattoo on Mrs. Peterson's ankle.
Mrs. Aguilar stated that she did not repo11 this matter to the police, however her
husband, Frank Aguilar, talked to a news reporter, Jodi Hernandez, and told her
the same information.
Mrs. Aguilar had no further information.

EXHIBIT K
RE: PETERSON
1-20-2003 Contact was made with Tony Freitas (1406 Cypress Ave. Modesto, CA
95350 (209) 574-9943).
Mr. Freitas stated that he is a Route Driver for Orowheat Bread, and on his route
he services restaurants. Mr. Freitas stated that on December 24, 2002 he was at
Perko's Restaurant on Yosemite Blvd making a delivery. Mr. Freitas said that
when he left Perko's he drove down Yosemite, and turned onto La Loma A venue.
Mr. Freitas said that this is his usual route to go to Denny's Restaurant at 5 points
McHenry Ave.
Mr. Freitas said that as he drove down La Loma, he recalls seeing whom he now
recognizes from the posters and photographs, as Laci Peterson. Mr. Freitas said
that he recalled specifically that she was walking a golden retriever type dog, that
she was obviously pregnant, and, that she was wearing dark clothing. Mr. Freitas
said that he is not positive on the time, however he believes that it was at least
9:45 A.M. Mr. Freitas said that Laci was walking on the South side of the street,
heading West, toward town. Mr. Freitas said that she was across the street from
the triangular shaped grass/park like area, which is close to the Miller Ave.
intersection. Mr. Freitas said that he did reca11 seeing 2 "scraggily" looking male
subjects at the bus stop bench, located at this triangular shaped property.
Mr. Freitas said that he would check with his boss and attempt to locate his work
records that will show the time he left Perko's. Mr. Freitas said that he would
phone as soon as he was able to obtain the infonnation.
Mr. Freitas stated that on January 4, 2003, his friend, Chris Rawley came to his
home to visit. Mr. Freitas said that he told his friend that he saw the posters
indicating that Laci Peterson was missing, and that he recalled seeing her on
December 24, 2002. Mr. Freitas said that he telephoned the police while his friend
was there to report what he saw. Mr. Freitas said that he talked to a female,
however he did not recall her name. Mr. Freitas said that Detectives have not
contacted him regarding this matter.
EXHIBIT L
January 24, 2003
Rev. Vern Deatherage

Modesto Gospel Mission
1400 Yosemite Blvd
Modesto, CA 95354
Dear Vern:
As we discussed during our meeting on January 23, 2003, I have enclosed a flyer
requesting assistance and information regarding the disappearance of Laci
Peterson.
I sincerely appreciate your help in introducing us to your congregation. I am

hopeful that there is someone who might be able to assist us with information .
Should you have any questions, don't hesitate to call me. Again, Thank you!
Very truly yours,
Gary L. Ermoian
EXHIBIT M
INVESTIGATfVE REPORT
RE: PETERSON
2-27-2003 An interview was conducted with Vivian Mitchell at her residence (23 1
Buena Vista Dr. Modesto, CA 95354 (209) 523-5917).
Mrs. Mitchell stated that she did see Laci Peterson on Christmas Eve Morning (12-
24-2002) walking her dog.
Mrs. Mitchell explained that she was standing at her kitchen window, which faces
La Sombra Avenue. Mrs. Mitchell said that she observed Laci Peterson walking
her golden retriever dog east on La Sombra, approaching the intersection of Buena
Vista Dr. Mrs. Mitchell said that when they reached the comer, the dog tried to go
south on Buena Vista, and Laci was trying to go the opposite direction. Mrs.
Mitchell said that she recalled telling her husband, "'Bill, there's the lady with the
pretty dog". Mrs. Mitchell said that Laci got the dog turned around and they then
walked north on Buena Vista toward La Loma Ave. Mrs. Mitchell said that she
believes that it was approximately 10:00 A.M. to 10:30 A.M. when she saw Laci.
Mrs. Mitchell said that she recalled seeing Laci walk her dog in the area before,
and has recognized her from the pictures that have been published.
Mrs. Mitchell stated that on the morning when she saw Laci (12-24-2002) the sun
had come out and she recalled that the golden retriever's coat shined in the sun.
Mrs. Mitchell said that she telephone the police about a week later and told them
what she saw. Mrs. Mitchell said that the lady she spoke with at Modesto Police
Department did not seem very interested in what she had to say.
Mrs. Mitchell had no further information.

EXHIBIT N
RE: PETERSON
5-27-2003 Contact was made with Grace Wolf at her residence (504 Phoenix
Modesto, CA 95354 (209) 522-2128).
Ms. Wolf stated that she saw Laci Peterson walking her dog on 12/24/2002
sometime between 9:30 A.M. and 9:45 A.M. on Encina Ave.
Ms. Wolf explained that on 12/24/2002 she left her home between 8:30 A.M. and
8:45 A.M. to give her son a ride to a location on Morris Avenue. Ms. Wolf said
that it only took her about 10 minutes to get to thjs location. Ms. Wolf said that
after dropping her son off, she then went to Save Mart on t 7th Street (Downtown).
From there she drove home.
Ms. Wolf said that she was driving east on Encina, when she observed Laci
Peterson walking west on Encina, between Santa Barbara and Santa Cruz
A venues, on the opposite side of the street. Ms. Wolf said that she was driving
slowly and both she and Laci made eye contact and smiled at each other. Ms. Wolf
said that she and Laci both recognized each other because she had seen both Laci
and Scott Peterson walking their dog passed her home on a few occasions and she
said hello to both Scott and Laci.
Ms. Wolf said that on 12/24/2002 Laci was wearing black pants and a blue nylon
type jacket. Ms Wolf said that she could not see what kind of shirt she was
wearing. Ms. Wolf said that she did see that Laci was pregnant and she was
walking her golden retriever dog. Ms. Wolf said that since this day she has seen
photographs of both Laci and Scott Peterson in the newspapers and on the news.
Ms. Wolf stated that she is certain that it was Laci Peterson who she saw on
12/24/2002.
Ms. Wolf said that she did not see any other vehicles parked on the street or
driving nearby where Laci was walking.
Ms. Wolf stated that she believes that it was the Sunday prior to 12/24/2002, Laci
and Scott Peterson walked by her home. Ms. Wolf said that it was about 3:30 P.M.
to 4:00 P.M. and she was working in her yard. She said that Laci and Scott were
walking from the direction of East La Loma Park, down Phoenix A venue and
toward the walking path that connects Phoenix Avenue to Encina. Ms. Wolf said
that both appeared very happy, smiling, laughing and holding hands. Both said
hello as they passed. Ms. Wolf stated that both Laci and Scott have beautiful
smiles.
Ms. Wolf said that previously, Scott and Laci had walked by her home going in
the same direction. She said that her 3-year-old granddaughter was with her in the
yard. Ms. Wolf said that her granddaughter told them that she liked their dog, so
Scott and Laci stopped and talked a short while. Ms. Wolf said that Scott asked the
age her granddaughter; they talked about kids, and their dog.
Ms. Wolf stated that when she saw the television news about Laci disappearing,
she immediately told her family about seeing Laci on 12/24/2002. Ms. Wolf said
that she was hesitant in calling the police because they were discrediting anyone
who claimed that they saw Laci.
Ms. Wolf said that her own son was murdered and his body dumped in Merced
County. She said that this occurred about 3 years ago. Ms. Wolf said that every
time she thinks about Laci, it reminds her of her son.
Ms. Wolf said that she would be willing to assist if needed further.
0
EXHIBIT 0
[For media exhibits, please see Exhibit O to the declaration
of Gary Ermoian, attached as Exhibit 9 to the Motion for
DNA Testing, filed concurrently herewith.]
EXHIBIT P
RE: PETERSON
8-29-2003 An interview was conducted with Leora Garcia at her residence (1684
Dickey Court Ripon, CA (209) 599-4829). Mrs. Garcia is a driving instructor for
Loves Driving School.
Mrs. Garcia stated that on 12-24-2002, she gave driving lessons to a Noah Ortiz.
Mrs. Garcia said that she drove to Ortiz's home at 840 Big Creek Ceres, CA, and
arrived at approximately 9:50 A.M. She said that she spoke with Mr. Garcia's
father for about 10 minutes, went over the features of the car with Ortiz. She said
that they then drove off for the 2 hours lesson.
Mrs. Garcia said that from Ortiz' residence, they drove to Hackett Rd., to Morgan
Rd., right on Hatch Rd., left on Central Ave., left on River Rd., right on 9th Street,
Right on D Street. Mrs. Garcia noted that while turning onto D Street, she
observed a 4 door, full size pickup, gold colored, pulling an aluminum boat. The
boat was black and red in color. She did not see the occupants of the pickup. The
pickup appeared to have a blue tarp in the back, with black tape or rope around it.
Mrs. Garcia stated that they continued to drive on D Street to Burney where they
turned left and drove past the DMV Building, turned right on G Street and through
the round-a-bout onto La Loma Ave. She said that they turned left onto the first
street past the bridge (Buena Vista) and traveled onto Encina Ave. Mrs. Garcia
said that at the point where Encina and Edgebrook Drives intersect from Buena
Vista, there is a grassy area with a utility building. Mrs. Garcia said that on this
grassy area, she saw an older, reddish-orange-colored dog, with white around its
face. She continued to say that the dog had leather, reddish-colored leash attached
to it. Mrs. Garcia said that the dog seemed as though it knew where it was going.
She said that it was walking along the Edgebrook Dr. area (easterly direction).
Mrs. Garcia stated that when they reached this point in their drive, she believed
that the time was approximately I 0:25 A.M., no later than 10:35 A.M.
Mrs. Garcia said that they continued to drive around the block and then headed
back down Edgebrook Dr., toward La Loma Ave.
Mrs. Garcia stated that as they came around a curve and down the hill (on Buena
Vista), she observed an older model light-colored van, parked at the curbside, near
the park. She described the area where the van was parked as near the steps going
down into the park. Mrs. Garcia continued to say that it appeared to her that there
had been some kind of scuffle, which had just occurred, and the door to the van
was shut in a hurry, and caught a piece of quilted material, like a coat. She said
that the material was dark in color. Mrs. Garcia said that the van squealed it's tires
as it pulled away from the curb very fast. She said that the van ran the stop sign at
La Loma, and turned right driving towards downtown. Mrs. Garcia said that she
had a very bad feeling about the van, and felt as though something bad had taken
place. Mrs. Garcia said that this "Fear Factor" feeling shot through her. She said
that she made this comment to her student driver and told him that they needed to
get the license number of the van. She said she was able to see that the van had
faded Texas License Plates, with a faded rainbow on the plate. She said that she
got a partial plate number of: NGH4. Mrs. Garcia described the van as being off
white or light tan, with a metal rack on top. She said that as the van turned the
comer onto La Loma, it appeared that it had a solid sliding door with no windows.
She said that there might have been writing on the side of the van. Mrs. Garcia
said that she believes that there was more than one occupant in the van; as the door
to the van was opened and the dark colored quilted material was pulled into the
van and that door was re-shut. She said that she also noticed that the van had some
paint chipping on the upper rear portion of right rear side of the van. Mrs. Garcia
said that the rear windows of the van were darkly tinted or mirrored.
Mrs. Garcia said that she believes that the van drove through the round a bout and
turned left (west) onto H Street. Mrs. Garcia said that they lost sight of the van
after this. Mrs. Garcia said that she is not sure of the make of the van, but her first
impression was that it was a Chevrolet.
Mrs. Garcia said that when she got home that evening, she told her husband and
her children what she saw. She sajd that she also told her husband that she needed
to watch the news, because she wanted to see if anything had happened in the La
Loma area that day. Mrs. Garcia said that when she heard about Laci Peterson, she
told her husband that she should call the police. She said that her husband told her
that she should not call, since she did not have a very good description of the van
or a fu ll plate number.
Mrs. Garcia said that she later on told some friends, who encouraged her to
telephone the police. Mr. Garcia said that she did phone the Modesto Police about
a week or two later. She said that she spoke to a woman, who took her statement.
She said that later on an Officer Hicks phoned her and said that he was going to
come by to show her some photographs of a truck and boat. She said that Officer
Hicks never came by, however. Mrs. Garcia said that they Modesto Police were
more interested in the pickup and boat that she saw, than the van that sped away
from the La Loma Park.
Mrs. Garcia was able to provide her calendar, which had the information about her
12-24-2002 appointment with Noah Ortiz.
Mrs. Garcia stated that she had another appointment with Norah Ortiz on 1-11-
2003, and they again drove the same route as on 12-24-2002. This appointment
was also calendared, however in her current 2003 book.
u.,.,, ...
-2002
'
~2002
tlRliffjj
I I I • t I 1
• ... It " u,.
I • t I P I t l !I . . 11 II I f JO '1
t0 II fl Ut• UK
U .. tt Jtlt II n D' ,:JtfltNTI•
ff ltll
,. • • 1 1 . , . .
MONDAY
J~ i - - - - ~-y--.J rliJ1--W,
TU-E-SD _E _D_N_ES
- D-~~y--,J
6:tl
~
~
9:JO
U5
10:00
10.15
10.30
:
~
1045
11 11n ~ t I td OI 1111o c o , re.s 11:00 \
;;~ ~ j4.,-~es::z..
1u 5 / ' 4 " ' \ V,C/
::~ u
11,s
_ _ =_.'f,o
,jo·
1115
1130
1145
12:00 )
\I
'\.
+
12 15 \.
.
=
:
12 JO , t ,.I \
1 45 I J ,. 12 s , I 12'45 I.
1. 1n • J l'f I.,.,,, ,v•.lt~ 1<1c:ui' 1:1
=f--
I f-Q', : , , \ v~...., ~..JJ 1:00
y.JICL..0..--l---=:...!...l=i.MUIW!!•- 1=-- - - - - - -
·l
1 5 - • 1. 1! 115
I t;o Ii '1"11\1 I ){7 ,"::, - - , V ,r- " VYlQ ,,iT 130 7 I
1, m I.J./ \:/~ 2,1n TI} V 1--' -,;

145
I
I ~
2:00
215 I ~
230 I
~
I
2.0
3:00
315
~
30 l"-f I ' 3:30 330
B45 345 345

4:00
~
415
4 JO
~
U 5
5:00
~
5 16
5 JO
Ii
545
8:00
If
"4,1~
~ , -- - - ''-- · -
,__,\:: .......~~~=l;_
~~~s- - - - - - - - - - -1~--
c,,t'1" 8:00 e 15
6 JO
Iii
645 eo
•
7:00
I?
71S
730
a
~
745
e:00 \ r~ a:oo 8:00 /1

1s_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . : B . . : . : 1 5 : . . . . . - - - - - - - - - - - -1- - - ' - - - - - - - -
:.•!!
8 15 V
\""'~
, _..
830 8'.l0 a JO
--,~
845 545
~ ~
EXHIBIT Q
RE: PETERSON
1-7-2003 Contact was made with Susan Medina at her residence (516 Covena
Modesto, CA 95354 (209) 578-3069 or cell 613-6583).
Mrs. Medina's residence is across the street from Scott Peterson's home. Mrs.
Medina's residence was burglarized during the time period that Laci Peterson
disappeared.
Mrs. Medina stated that on December 24, 2002, Robert Nickerson, a building
inspector for the City of Modesto came to her home to conduct an inspection. Mrs.
Medina said that Mr. Nickerson arrived between 8:15 A.M. and 8:30 A.M. Mrs.
Medina said that her husband let him in the side gate. She said that Mr. Nickerson
and her husband talked for a while after the inspection and she believes that Mr.
Nickerson left her home about 9:30 A.M.
Mrs. Medina said that she and her husband got ready to go to her son's residence
in Southern California for the Christmas holiday. Mrs. Medina said that while they
were in their vehicle in their driveway, she telephoned her son to let him know
they were on their way. Mrs. Medina said that she telephoned her son at 10:33
A.M. Mrs. Medina was able to confirm this with her cellular telephone bill. Mrs.
Medina said that when they left, she recalled looking around the neighborhood and
she noticed that Mr. Peterson's pickup was not home at that time. Mrs. Medina
said that Laci Peterson's vehicle was parked in the driveway.
Mrs. Medina stated that she had noticed a light-powder-blue colored pickup
parked about 1 house down. She said that she had noticed this vehicle in the
neighborhood more than one time during the month of December. Mrs. Medina
described the truck as an older, possibly 80's model mid-sized pickup. She said
that it appeared to be a worker's truck. Mrs. Medina said that she did not see the
occupants of the vehicle.
Mrs. Medina said that she and her husband did not have a gardener doing their
yard maintenance during the time of Mrs. Peterson's disappearance.
Mrs. Medina stated that the police informed her that the burglars were in her home
for 3 hours. She said that the police also told her that the burglary occurred on
December 26, 2002. Mrs. Medina said that she feels that the police dismissed the
burglars as suspects in Mrs. Peterson's disappearance too quickly. Mrs. Medina
said that she did not believe that the burglars were in her house for 3 hours. She
said that there were many things, in plain view, that were not taken or tampered
with. Mrs. Medina said that for the most part, nothing was messed up in her home.
Mrs. Medina said that she also found it curious to think that the suspects would
commit the burglary in her home while so much was going on in the neighborhood
with police, etc. looking for Mrs. Peterson.
Mrs. Medina did supply the name of Eric Dias, who is a gardener who does yard
maintenance for some of the homes on Covena Ave.
EXHIBIT R
RE: PETERSON
1-10-2003 Contact was made with Mr. Robert Nickerson who is a Building
Inspector with the City of Modesto (577-5232 work or 545-0473 home).
Mr. Nickerson confirmed that he inspected a project at the Medina home at 516
Covena Modesto, CA. Mr. Nickerson said that he arrived at about 8:20 A.M. on
December 24, 2002, and went to the back yard area to inspect the building project.
Mr. Nickerson said that he spent about 50 minutes with the Medina's answering
some additional questions they had.
Mr. Nickerson said that he believes he left the Medina home at about 9:20 A.M. to
9:25 A.M. Mr. Nickerson said that as he walked to his vehicle he had a clear view
of the Peterson residence. Mr. Nickerson said that there were no vehicles on the
street in front of the Peterson home, nor were there any vehicles in the driveway of
the residence.
Mr. Nickerson said that he is familiar with the Petersons and their residence
because he inspected their swimming pool in December 2001.
Mr. Nickerson stated that when he left, he recalled that he had to drive around a
vehicle to get out. Mr. Nickerson said that he is not certain, but he believes that
there possibly was a white Ford Van parked in front of his vehicle that he had to
drive around. Mr. Nickerson said that he recalled that this van had 2 back doors
and the paint was chipping around the window and he could see gray primer. Mr.
Nickerson said that the van had a crnde rack on top with wooden cross supports.
Mr. Nickerson said that he cannot be sure that he saw this van in front of him
when he left the Medina's or another residence, however he does know that he had
to drive around something parked in front of him to ex.it from the Medina
residence.
Mr. Nickerson stated that he also saw a bicyclist dive by. He described the
individual as a white male, 40's with tan sweats and a windbreaker on a 10-speed
bike. Mr. Nickerson said that he was heading North toward the park.
Mr. Nickerson had no further information.

EXHIBIT S
EXHIBITS
RE: PETERSON
1-16-2003 Contact was made with Diane Jackson at her residence (1401
Edgebrook Dr. Modesto, CA 95354 (209) 525-8955).
Mrs. Jackson stated that on December 24, 2002 at 11 :40 A.M., she was driving
home from the hand therapist. She said that she droved down Covena Ave. toward
Edgebrook Drive. Mrs. Jackson said that as drove past the residence at 516
Covena, she observed three short, dark skinned males standing near a tan/beige
van. Mrs. Jackson said that the males were dark skinned; however they were not
African American. She said that the van was parked on the street in front of 516
Covena.
Mrs. Jackson said that the back of the van had 2 doors. The left door was open and
the right door was closed. Mrs. Jackson said that she could not see inside the van.
Mrs. Jackson said that one male was standing on one side of the open door, and
another male subject was standing on the other side of the open door. Mrs. Jackson
said that the third male was standing on the grass about 5 feet away.
Mrs. Jackson stated that she at first thought that they were landscapers, however
she did not observe any tools. Mrs. Jackson said that as she past, they all turned
and looked at her as she passed. Mrs. Jackson said that she found this unusual.
Mrs. Jackson said that she had the feeling that they were up to no good.
Mrs. Jackson said that she is sure of her time because as she drove home from the
hand therapist, she knew that her husband would be home at 12:00 P.M. for .lunch.
She said that when she pulled into her driveway, she looked at her watch and it
was 11 :40 A.M. She said that she made a mental note to herself that she wou1d
have time to fix her husband lunch.
Mrs. Jackson stated that when she heard that the Medina 1 s home at 516 Covena
was burglarized on the Friday after Christmas, she telephoned the police to tell
them what she saw.
Mrs. Jackson said that tomorrow (1-17-2003) she is scheduled for hypnosis at the
Modesto Police Department, in an attempt for her to remember more about what
she saw.
Mrs. Jackson said that she would call if she remembered any further information.
T
EXHIBIT T
RE: PETERSON
5-19-2003 Contact was made with Superior Court Judge Ricardo Cordova ( 1522
Edgebrook Drive Modesto, CA (209) 523-9083). Judge Cordova lives around the
comer from the Peterson residence.
Judge Cordova stated that on 12/23/2002 at approximately 10:15 P.M., someone

knocked on his door. Judge Cordova said that he was already in bed, and by the
time he got to the door, she saw a male subject walking across his lawn. Judge
Cordova said that he went outside and confronted the individual, who he described
as a white male adult, late 30's, 5' IO", 170 pounds, and dirty blonde hair.
Judge Cordova said that this male subject told him that his girlfriend was visiting a
sick relative at Tuolumne General Hospital, and her car broke down in Greeley
Hill, and he asked for money to go help her. This subject told Judge Cordova that
he lived in the neighborhood, indicating a house with a wh ite station wagon in the
driveway. Judge Cordova said that the man also told him that he tried to contact
some of the neighbors, however no one else was home. Judge Cordova said that
he sent the individual away.
Judge Cordova stated that he felt that this subject was casing out his home and
possibly the neighborhood.
Judge Cordova said that at the time he was an attorney for the Public Defender's
office, and there was a burglary case that his office conflicted out of. Judge
Cordova said that in this case, the defendant used the same story, about hi.s
girlfriend being broken down in Greeley Hill. Judge Cordova said that he looked
at the booking photograph of this defendant, however it was not the same person
who came to his home on 12/23/2002.
Judge Cordova said that early morning on Christmas Day (12/25/2002) he talked
to Detective Sebron Banks of the Modesto Police Department. Judge Cordova said
that he knows Detective Banks from previous cases through the public defender
and from various public service activities. Judge Cordova said that he explained
the situation regarding the subject on 12/23/2002, and as he was walking with
Detective Banks to show him where the subject indicated he lived, he observed a
pair of women's sandals, with a flower pattern, laying along side the roadway.
Judge Cordova said that the shoes were located about 3 houses away from the
Peterson residence. Judge Cordova said that he pointed the shoes out to Detective
Banks. Judge Cordova said that Detective Banks showed no interest in the shoes
and walked on. Judge Cordova said that Detective Banks did not take any notes or
write down his statement.
Judge Cordova stated that on 12/26/2002 he was driving home and he observed
the Modesto Police search team. Judge Cordova said that he recognized Detective
Doug Ridenhour, so he approached him and told him about the subject casing his
home on 12/23/2002. Judge Cordova said Detective Ridenhour asked him to wait
for the Sergeant in charge to arrive to take his statement. Judge Cordova said that
he gave his report to the Sergeant (name unknown) in charge, who took down his
name and made notes. Judge Cordova said that this was the first that anyone
actually made a report about the incident.
Judge Cordova said that another neighbor, Albert Urquidez, who lives at the
northeast corner of Covina and Edge brook, told him that the same guy came to his
house on 12/23/2002 and said that he was looking for his dog. The subject also
pointed out that he lived at the house with the white station wagon.
Judge Cordova stated that on 12/27/2002 or 12/28/2002, Detective Reed from

Modesto Police came to his home as they were canvassing the neighborhood.
Judge Cordova said he again told them about the guy casing his house on
12/23/2002. Judge Cordova said that it was obvious that there was no
communication between the officers, as they had no information about his report
of this incident.
Judge Cordova said that he had previously met the Petersons at a community
meeting regarding issues in their neighborhood. Judge Cordova said that he
recalled Scott and Laci Peterson stating that when they took walks in the park, and
encountered homeless or transient people camping-out, they would approach them
and tell them to leave. Judge Cordova said that he thought this to be a bit bold and
potentially dangerous. Judge Cordova said that he was concerned to think that
Laci might be bold enough to confront someone like this on her own.
Judge Cordova had no further information at this time.

EXHIBIT U
RE: PETERSON
5-27-2003 Contact was made with Patty Ringler (1313 Highland Dr. Modesto, CA
95354 (209) 527-3780 or cell 324-5539).
Mrs. Ringler stated that on 12/25/2002 at approximately 6:30 A.M., an old, brown
colored van drove slowly down Highland Dr. near her home. Mrs. Ringler said
that the van stalled in front of her home.
Mrs. Ringler said that there were 2 women in the van, and one of the women
exited the van, swearing. Mrs. Ringler said that this woman appeared to be
agitated because the van stalled. Mrs. Ringler said that this woman came to the
front door of her home and told her that she had ran out of gas. Mrs. Ringler said
that the woman told her that she and her friend needed to get to Empire, CA. Mrs.
Ringler said that her husband gave the women some gas so they could drive on.
Mrs. Ringler stated that she asked the woman why she was driving down Highland
if she was going to Empire, and the woman told her that she always goes that way.
Mrs. Ringler said that the woman appeared to be in a hurry. She continued to say
that the woman reminded her of"drug people". Mrs. Ringler described the woman
who came to her door as a white female, slight build, long dark hair, rough looking
and not very well dressed. Mrs. Ringler said that the other woman stayed inside
the van and she did not get a good look at her.
Mrs. Ringler described the van as having windows in the back, solid on the sides,
and with some type of rectangular "cardboard stuff' tied on top.
Mrs. Ringler had no further information.

V
EXHIBIT V
RE: PETERSON
6- 14-2003 Contact was made with Kathy Albert at her place of employment (USA
Gas Station 1510 Miller Ave. Modesto, CA 95354-Home: 1530 W. Orangeburg
Ave. Modesto, CA 209-544-1995).
Ms. Albert is a clerk at the USA Gas Station on Miller Ave. Ms. Albert stated that
she observed a tan/cream-colored van hanging out in the parking lot of the
business during the month of December 2002. Ms. Albert described the van as
being an older model, full size van, with a tan/cream-colored spare tire cover in
the rear, silver colored ladder in rear, and cream-colored curtains.
Ms. Albert stated that there were 2 males that were inside the van. Ms. Albert
described the driver of the van as a Mexican Male Adult, 6feet tall, large build,
and short hair. The other subject was described as a White Male Adult, Med
height, 135 lbs, and "scruffy" looking.
Ms. Albert said that she had to chase them off of the lot for loitering at least 4
different times. She said that they also tried to steal gasoline. Ms. Albert said that
she did write down the license plate number of the van, however misplaced it. Ms.
Albert said that she would continue to look around for the license plate number.
Ms. Albert said that she only works weekends. She said that the last time she saw
the van was on Saturday, December 21, 2002. Ms. Albert said that she did not
work on December 24, 2002. She said that she did not see the van any more when
she came back to work the following weekend.
Ms. Albert stated that when the van was hanging around the store, she observed on
3 different occasions the subjects from the van using the public telephone to call
someone. Ms. Albert said that a few minutes after they made their call, a male
subject in a white Dodge pickup would come to meet them.
EXHIBIT W
RE: PETERSON
1-16-2003 Contact was made via telephone with Brian Ulrich (Home: 523-9572 or
work: 527-521 0). Mr. Ulrich stated that he is a good friend of Scott and Laci
Peterson.
Mr. Ulrich stated that he wished to discuss an issue, which was of a concern to
him. Mr. Ulrich continued to say that the police officers investigating Laci's
disappearance have told him things that he has later found to be false.
Mr. Ulrich explained that police detectives told him that Scott Peterson came
home and instantly telephoned the police to report his wife missing. Mr. Ulrich
said that he knows that this is not true. Mr. Ulrich said that when the police
detectives telephoned to talk to him they also said that Scott Peterson refused to
allow them to enter his home on the night that he reported Laci missing. Mr.
Ulrich said that the police detectives told him that they had to get a wa1nnt to be
able to go inside Scott's home. Mr. Ulrich said that he knows that these statements
are also lies because he was present at Scott Peterson's home on the night of
December 24, 2002 when the police were there. Mr. Ulrich continued to say that
Mr. Peterson invited the police inside and Mr. Ulrich observed the police officers
go inside the Peterson home with Scott.
Mr. Ulrich stated that when the police detective called him, he asked for names of
friends Scott went lo college with. Mr. Ulrich said that he supplied names to the
detective. Mr. Ulrich said that he had talked to all the same people prior to the
police and everyone was positive that Scott bad nothing to do with Lad's
disappearance. Mr. Ulrich said that after the police detectives talked to the same
people, he again had conversations with them. Mr. Ulrich said that each had
changed their minds and said that they believed that Scott might have had
something to do with Laci's disappearance.
Mr. Ulrich said that he believes that the police are intentionally lying to people to
tum them against Scott Peterson.
Mr. Ulrich stated that there might be a mistake in his statement to the police. Mr.
Ulrich explained that when the police asked him about Scott's boat, he said that he
might have heard about the boat a few months ago. Mr. Ulrich said that the police
then told him that Scott didn't get the boat until early December 2002. Mr. Ulrich
said that he wanted to make it clear that he never actually saw the boat in question.
Mr. Ulrich said that Scott has always had hitches for trailers, etc. on his truck, and
he may have discussed with Scott at some point about a boat.
Mr. Uhich said that he saw Scott and Laci Peterson at a Christmas party on
December 13, 2002 at the Law Office of Curtis and Arrata. Mr. Ulrich said that
they both were very happy, and having a good time. Mr. Ulrich said that they were
both excited about the baby and looking forward to the birth. Mr. Ulrich said that
they were both very excited when they found out that the baby is a boy.
X
EXHIBIT X
RE: PETERSON
l0-21-2003 An interview was conducted with Greg Reed (1 705 Edgebrook Dr.
Modesto, CA 95354 (209) 483-9917).
Mr. Reed stated that he never saw anything in Scott or Laci Peterson's behavior,
which would cause him to question their relationship.
Mr. Reed said that Scott did a lot of work around the house. He said that Laci
made a list, which was posted on the refrigerator. Mr. Reed said that Laci included
in her list a time period for when Scott was supposed to be done with each project.
Mr. Reed stated that about I week before her disappearance, Laci telephoned Mr.
Reed and asked him to help her can-y in a table saw, which was a Christmas gift
for Scott. He said that he and a friend went to her home and carried the box inside,
where Laci had it already to sit on some wrapping paper and wrap.
Mr. Reed stated that on 12-24-2002, at approximately 2:30 P.M. to 2: 40 P.M. he

telephoned Scott to tell him about their New Year's Eve Party. Mr. Reed said that
it was obvious that Scott was driving. He said that they didn't talk about what he
was doing, but he sounded as though everything was fine. Mr. Reed said that there
was nothing unusual about Scott's voice.
Mr. Reed said that he gets the Cabella's Catalog. He said that one time, while at
their Lamaze class, he and Scott were looking in the catalog. He said that they
came across a kid's camouflage outfit. Mr. Reed said that Scott really got a kick
out of it. He said that had a good time talking about buying such an outfit for their
kids.
Mr. Reed stated that they had good times while attending the Lamaze classes and
after class was over. Mr. Reed said that Scott would always bring some premium
beers or wines for them to drink. Mr. Reed said that Laci knew a lot about wine,
also, as she worked in the wine business at one time.
Mr. Reed said that Scott attended the St. Francis Yacht Club, stag event as his
guest. Mr. Reed said that Scott had a good time at the event.
Mr. Reed stated that he and Scott did not talk about fishing. He said that they did
talk about hunting on one occasion. He said that they did talk about golf, and Laci
had commented about Scott playing golf at Del Rio quite often. Mr. Reed said that
from conversations, he knew that Scott was an excellent golfer.
Mr. Reed said that he never saw Scott loose his temper. Mr. Reed said that Scott
seemed to take things in stride.
Mr. Reed stated that Scott treated Laci very well. He said that Scott and Laci had a
great relationship and he never heard a negative comment from either one.
Mr. Reed said that on 12-24-2002, they received a message from Scott about 6:00
P.M. He said that Scott was asking if they saw Laci. He said that Scott's voice was
cracking.
Mr. Reed stated that he and his wife went to the Peterson home. He said that there
were a lot of people standing around outside. He said that he let the police go
through his grandmother's home, next door to the Peterson home, to make sure no
one was hiding inside. He said that he got the impression from the police that they
thought Scott had did something to Laci.
Mr. Reed said that when they returned at 11 :00 P.M., they talked to one of the
same officers, and be made a comment, which again made Mr. Reed believe that
the police thought that Scott had done something to Laci. Mr. Reed stated that he
made the comment to his wife while they were in their car, "They think he did it".
Mr. Reed said that he did not believe that the police were doing a very good job.
He said that 3 to 4 days after 12-24-2002, he went to check on his grandmother's
home, and the police were there, stating that they needed to get into the house to
check it out. Mr. Reed said that he told them that he had already let officers in on
12-24-2002, and they were not even aware of it.
Mr. Reed said that Guy Meligi, who was a friend of Scott's, alienated Scott after
he heard of Scott infidelity. Mr. Reed said that Meligi was the one who took the
Peterson's to the Rotary summer social.
Mr. Reed stated that Scott never talked to him about other women.
Mr. Reed had no further information.

Y
EXHIBIT Y
RE: PETERSON
11-10-2003 Contact was made with Aaron Fritz (99 E. Littlefield, #25 Mountain
View, CA 94043 408-472-1104).
Mr. Fritz stated that Detective Brocchini tried to extract information from him
regarding Scott Peterson. Mr. Fritz said that Brocchini asked him if he thought that
a guy in Scott's situation would be acting differently.
Mr. Fritz said that he has known Scott for over 16 years, and Scott was extremely
distraught and saddened over Laci's disappearance. Mr. Fritz said that anyone in
Scott's situation, with the media houndjng him continuously, would begin to
change their normal behavior.
Mr. Fritz stated that prior to Laci's disappearance, Scott was very happy about the
baby. Mr. Fritz said that Scott had done a lot of work getting the baby's room
ready. Mr. Fritz said that Scott and Laci had a list on the refrigerator of the things
to be done in preparation for the baby. Mr. Fritz said that Scott spoke very fondly
of these obligations.
Mr. Fritz said that Brocchini told him to ask Scott if there were any other women
be was involved with other than Amber. Mr. Fritz said that Brocchini told him that
there were a total of 6 women that Scott had affairs with, and that he had already
spoken with 2, an<l was going to be traveling down south to talk to others.
Mr. Fritz stated that he knew nothing of Scott having an affair with Amber Frey
(or anyone else) until after it came out in the media. Mr. Fritz said that when he
did talk to Scott, he was very upset, and emba1Tassed by the situation. Mr. Fritz
said that he could understand why Scott did not say anything to anyone about the
affair, however he wished that Scott would have came to him earlier to warn him
about it coming out in the news.
Mr. Fritz said that Scott told him that while the police were searching his home,
one of the officers approached him (Scott) while outside the house, and told Scott
that he was sorry that Scott had to deal with Brocchini. Mr. Fritz said that Scott
told him that the officer said that he was sorry that Brocchini was focused on
Scott, because when Brocchini gets his mind set on finding something, he will find
a way to find it, whether or not it is actually there. Mr. Fritz said that he found this
infonnation unusual and disturbing. He continued to say that there must be
something definitely wrong when another member of the police department is
apologizing for Brocchini's behavior.
Mr. Fritz stated that Brocchini told him, "I'm going to get this guy", referring to
Scott. Mr. Fritz said that he's not sure of the exact wording Brocchini used, but it
was very much like he was "going to bring him down". Mr. Fritz said that he was
in awe of the comments. Mr. Fritz said that Brocchini made these comments to
him early on in the case.
Mr. Fritz said that Brocchini continually told him, "I've got this on your
friend .. .I've got this ... ", etc. Mr. Fritz said that Brocchini indicated that he had all
this proof; however never actually told Mr. Fritz was this proof was.
Mr. Fritz said that Brocchini never talked to his wife, Heidi. Mr. Fritz said that
Heidi did make the comment to Scott that she thought he should get another
lawyer early on in the case. Mr. Fritz said that from their position, there was all
this media attention saying such bad things about Scott, and no one was countering
the information with the truth. Mr. Fritz said that this was just their opinion, and it
was not suggested by anyone else.
No further infonnation.
EXHIBIT 7
EXHIBIT
Declaration of Paige
Paige McGrail
1 Declaration of Paige McGrail
2 I, Paige McGrail, hereby declare under penalty of perjury that the fo llowing is true and
4 1. I am an attorney admitted to practice law in the state of California. I have been
s investigating and litigating claims of factual innocence in serious felony cases for over five years.
6 2. I am a Staff Attorney with the Los Angeles Innocence Project (LAIP), which
1 currently represents Mr. Scott Peterson in In re Scott Peterson, Petition for a Writ of Habeas
B Corpus pending before the California Court of Appeal, First Appellate District, Case No.
9 A167615, filed April 19, 2023, asserting violations of state and federal constitutional rights and
10 state statutory rights, including Brady claims and a claim of actual innocence, which is supported
11 by newly discovered evidence.
12 3. As part of LAIP's review of Mr. Peterson's case, LAIP has contacted Mr.
13 Peterson's previous counsel to obtain his case materials. In this process, LAJP has obtained
14 copies of the following:
1s a. Trial record (RT and CT);
16 b. Post-conviction record including appellate and habeas pleadings and
17 transcripts from post-conviction hearings;
18 c. Police reports and other materials produced in discovery at the time of trial;
19 d. Investigation files produced by defense counsel and investigators.
20 Review of Modesto Police Department Reports, Tips, Canvases, and Related Discovery
21 4. J conducted a thorough review of the MPD witness reports and tips that were in
22 the discovery provided to Mr. Peterson at the time of trial, including information that was called
23 into the MPD tip line set up to enable the public to assist in the search for Laci Peterson and
2~ evidence related to her disappearance. My review revealed the following information, with
2s witnesses' personal information redacted to protect their privacy.

26 5. Linda Chilies: Bates 14786 includes citizen reports provided to MPD on
21 December 28, 2002, including the following:
28
DECLARATION OF PAIGE McGRAIL

I
1
2 0918 hrs Lindas CHILLES, On Christmas Eve at 0930 hrs, when she
returned home she saw 3 suspects in a van. The van did not have any paint on it. She
3 said Sl ,vas \VM..4., 3040s, S'1 1, shoulder length dark brO\\>n greasy hair, mustache,
dark quilt type jacket. S2 was WMA 30-40 balding, medium build, flannel shirt. S3 she
4 did not see well. They were walking from the park up to their van until they saw her.
They then backed off. She thought this was suspicious.
5
7 6. In my review of the MPD reports present in Mr. Peterson's post-conviction file,
8 I found no reports related to any investigatory follow up on the information Ms. Chilles provided.
9 7. On October 7, 2023, LAIP Director Paula Mitchell and I contacted Linda Chilies
10 at her home in Modesto, California. She agreed to speak with us regarding what she could recall
11 about information she provided to MPD related to the disappearance of Laci Peterson.
12 8. We showed Ms. Chilles a copy of the information provided to MPD that was
13 attributed to her. She recalled having seen a van on Covena Avenue the morning of December
14 24, 2002, and provided us directions from her house to where she saw the van. From her home
15 on Encina Avenue, Ms. Chilies described turning left (north) onto Covena Avenue and then
16 observing the van to her right. We showed Ms. Chilies a map and she indicated seeing the van
17 in front of 516 Covena Avenue, where the Medinas resided.
18 9. Ms. Chilies explained to us that her late husband, Nick Chilles, had been a
19 detective with MPD and that Doug Ridenour had been his boss. Ms. Chilies recalled attending
20 the vigil for Laci Peterson on December 31, 2002, and stated that since no one from MPD
21 contacted her about the van sighting she reported, she specifically recalled approaching MPD
22 Det. Doug Ridenour and providing him with the information about the van and the suspicious
23 looking men she had seen on the morning of December 24. She was concerned that they did not
24 have any leads and fe lt that the information she had could be important.
25 10. Ms. Chilles did not recall anyone from MPD contacting her or following up on
26 the information she provided after she spoke to Det. Doug Ridenour about it on December 31,
27 2002.
28

2
1 11. Sharon P.: Bates 15095 includes citizen reports provided to MPD on January 8,
2 2003. The following information was provided:
3
1320 ht·s. Sh:tron ~ Lives on Miller from La Loma... Might have seen Laci
4 Peterson. Stopped on La Loma just south of the bridge before getting to
La Loma. This was on Christmas Eve, Tuesday, sometime after 11:30.
5 Laci was wearing all black, vecy pregnant. Looked at the person in the car
in front ofher, smiled, smiled at both her and the person behind her also.
6 She had the dog who was wagging it's tail. Tmued into Dry Creek Park
right past the bridge(on the right hand side of the road), thinks it was a
7
Labrador.
8
12. In my review of the MPD reports present in Mr. Peterson's post-conviction file,
9
I found no reports related to any investigatory follow up on the information Sharon P. provided.
10
13. On October 7, 2023, Paula Mitchell and I contacted Sharon P. She agreed to
11
speak with us regarding what she could recall about information she provided to MPD related to
12
the disappearance of Laci Peterson.
13
14. Sharon P. confirmed that the information provided to MPD is accurate to what
14
she recalls having seen.
15
15. Sharon P. was adamant that she saw Laci Peterson walking her dog across the
16
bridge and into the park. She explained that she recognized the dog as she had seen him in the
17
neighborhood previously. She explained that when she saw a photograph of Laci Peterson on
18
the news, she recognized her as the woman she saw walking into the park.
19
16. Sharon P. stated that until now, no one, from MPD or otherwise, ever fo llowed
20
up with her on the information she provided about seeing Laci Peterson alive the morning of
21
December 24, 2002.
22
17. Victoria Pouches: Bates 2716 includes a report authored by R. Bcffa indicating
23
that on December 25, 2002, Victoria Pouches approached an MPD investigator and provided
24
them with a statement. The following information is included in the report:

25
26 On 12/25/02 I was at East La Loma Park on a search for a missing person. I was approached by
Pouches who was jogging in the park on 12124/02 between.0930 hrs. and 1000 hrs. She said she
27 did not see the missing person but she did see a gold colored dog with a leash on. The dog was
on the North side of Dry Creek. It was pacing back and forth and barking "like crazy." She
28
could not pin point the area where she saw the dog but said it was West of the El Vista bridge.

3
1 Bates 2426 includes a report authored by Detective R. Reid indicating that on
2 December 30, 2002, Victoria Pouches was contacted during a canvas of the La Loma
3 neighborhood as she was walking on Covena Ave. The following information is included in the
4 report:
5 19. In my review of the MPD reports present in Mr. Peterson's post-conviction file,
6 I found no other reports related to following up on the information provided by Ms. Pouches.
7 Both reports indicating MPD contact with Ms. Pouches appear to be the product of independent
8
VICTORIA POUCHES-
9 While going door to door, Victoria POUCHES walked southbound on Covena from the dead
end/park. I made contact with POUCHES.
10
11
POUCHES said she had been walking on 12-24-2002 in Edgebrook Park. POUCHES said
between 0910 hours and 1000 hours, she saw a large yellowish dog running loose in the park,
12 north of the Covena dead end. The dog bad a collar and leash attached, but there was no one in
the area attempting to control the animal.
13
POUCHES said she had been attacked prior by a dog, therefore attempted to stay away from this
14
one. She also said she had spoken with an officer previously regarding Laci PETERSON and the
15 missing person report. I took POUCHES's infonnation to be referenced to the prior, unknown
officer's information.
16
POUCHES did not see anything related to the reported burglary.
17
canvasing efforts as opposed to directed efforts to fol low up on the information she provided.
18
20. On October 7, 2023, Paula Mitchell and I contacted Ms. Pouches. She agreed to
19
speak with us regarding what she could recall about information she provided to MPD related to
20
the disappearance of Laci Peterson.
21
21. Ms. Pouches confirmed that she saw the "Petersons' dog" in the park. She
22
explained that she had seen a picture of the dog on the news and that the dog she saw was "the
23
same dog." She confirmed that she saw the dog alone and it did not appear to be accompanied
24
by any owner. She recalled seeing the dog "barking nervously" and that it was on the opposite
25
side of the brook from her.
26
22. She recalled stopping the police to tell them that she had seen the dog. She
27
indicated that after she provided that information to the police, no one ever contacted her to
28

4
1 follow up. She indicated that the police never showed her a photo of the Petersons' dog to see
2 if it was the dog she saw on December 24, 2002.
3
4 I have reviewed this declaration in its entirety and it is accurate to the best of my knowledge. I
5 declare under penalty of perjury pursuant to the laws of the State of California, that the foregoing
6 is true and correct.
7
P'cr=~Y4v~
Paige McGrail
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

5
EXHIBIT 8
Declaration of George
George Michael Gudgell
1 Declaration of George Michael Gudgell
2 I, Mike Gudgell, hereby declare under penalty of perjury that the following is true and
4 1. I am a senior investigative journalist, recently retired as a producer at ABC
s News. I have over 40 years of experience as an investigative journalist and have been deeply
6 involved in investigating a wide range ofissues in a broad spectrum ofcases. I have held postings
7 in Los Angeles, London, Moscow, Iraq, Kuwait, and Kabul. I was a manager and gatekeeper
e with ABC to help guide coverage and help determine the content ofnews stories that ABC chose
9 to cover. I was also the ABC Bureau Chief in Iraq and a producer in Afghanistan during the time
10 the U.S. military was engaged in hostilities in those countries.
11 2. I have a great deal ofexperience investigating serious felony cases and high profile
12 cases, including the Oklahoma City bombing, space shuttle disaster, missing Malaysian airliner,
13 and criminal cases involving Chandra Levy and JonBenet Ramsey. I have been fortunate in that
14 I have received a number of awards for my work as an investigative reporter.
15 3. Ofthe many murder cases I have covered and investigated in my career, the media
1s coverage ofLaci Peterson's disappearance was by far the most intense and disruptive I have ever
17 experienced. The concept of the 24-hour cable news ~ycle was still relatively new in 2002, and
1a there was a great deal of pressure to fill the airtime. As a result, there were many networks and
19 media outlets competing for ..breaking news" stories. Programs like CNN's ''Nancy Grace" were
20 airing almost daily coverage of the investigation into Laci's disappearance as it unfolded with
21 commentary that was not always accurate or supported by any actual evidence. The intensity of
22 the coverage and the public's interest in the case was exacerbated by the advent of the internet,
23 which made it possible to constantly disseminate the inaccurate commentary and false narratives
24 reported by the tabloid media to a vast audience with lightning speed.
25 4. I began investigating the evidence in the case involving the disappearance and
26 murder of Laci Peterson in December 2002, and I was on the scene in Modesto a few days after
21 Laci disappeared I coordinated ABC News coverage of the trial and sentencing proceedings in
28
DECLARATION OF GEORGE MICHAEL GUDGELL

1
1 People v. Scott Peterson in 2004-2005, which was held in San Mateo County instead of Stanislaus
2 County.
3 5. I recall reaching outto defense investigator, Gaiy Ennoian, in May 2003, not long
4 after Mr. Peterson was arrested, in an effort to obtain reliable information about the case. I was
5 frustrated by the fact that cable news shows were rebroadcasting tabloid reports that were not
6 based on reliable facts or reliable reporting. The email below expresses the frustration I
7 experienced as I was trying to find accurate, reliable information about the investigation into what
a happened to Laci Peterson.
9 From: "Gudgell, Mike" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
10 Sent: Thunday, May 08, 2003 1:oo PM
SubJ•ct: Introduction
11
12
Mr. Ermolan:
13
rm a producer for ABC News I'm In charge of akl
14 cont•~. As you cen tmaglne the Laci Peterson~to,y 'l:':e:~•~:~W:tport Is accurate both In fact and
15 latndls pwondea111cula~~llfftcult'twhelin the cable show, rebroadcast tabloid reporta. Our broldcest producers ... all this
r ...., can con rm similar details.
16
I'm not going to even ask. But as Kirk McAIHster'a Investigator you probably know more about this case and
ScoTVtt,than anyone else. So when you see something that la so pure lctlon that you went to throw your'shoe al
17 th• and feel compelled to aet the record straight, please give me a cell.
18 There may be a time When you can, at least, reveal what Isn't true. Ploase be assured I will treat the Information
with discretion. I'm a careful professtonal. My principals are of far more value than any •,coop". or ony sto,y.
19
You can reach me by emall or at 206-915-3833 (digllal cell phone).
20
At. aome point I'd welcome the opportunity to meet with yuu. I ive in Soattle but for the past two years I've spent
21 most of my time In Modesto.
22 Mike Gudgell
ABC News
23
24 6. In my discussions with other journalists who were covering the case in-depth at
25 the time of trial, as 1 was, I learned that most were conflicted about the jury's verdict, given the
26 evidence presented. Contrary to what I saw widely (and falsely) reported by the tabloid media
27 and cable news shows at the time, I saw no direct or forensic or biological evidence supporting
28 i
Mr. Peterson's guilt presented at the trial, and my own investigation u~coveredrtant leads
(\
DECLARATION OF GEORGE MICHAFL GUDGELL .

2
1 to other suspects I believe were not adequately pursued. In fact, much ofthe coverage I saw was
2 incorrect and/or misleading.
3 7. My investigation into Laci Petersons' disappearance has been fairly steady over
4 the last 21 years and it continues to this day. Investigative steps I have taken include: reaching
5 out to members oflaw enforcement, family members, and witnesses in the area; submitting Public
6 Records Act requests; and conducting hundreds of interviews with witnesses, attorneys, experts,
1 and individuals with background knowledge of the Modesto Police Department (MPD), the
a Stanislaus County District Attorney' s Office, and other law enforcement agencies involved in the
9 investigation into who killed Laci and Conner Peterson.
10 8. Over the course of my career as an investigative journalist, I have interviewed
11 hundreds of witnesses from a variety of backgrounds, in various and often very difficult
12 circumstances. Integrity in reporting is essential to the truth-seeking function that lies at the heart
13 of investigative journalism. My training and experience have endowed me with an understanding
14 that it is important not to take claims or witness statements at face value, but to instead confirm
15 claims and statements with corroborating evidence. In the course ofmy investigation in this case,
16 I conducted considerable research and interviewed numerous witnesses in an effort to verify and
11 provide support·and corroboration for new informati?n and facts I was able to uncover before
1s reaching any conclusions ofmy own.
19 9. My own investigation uncovered exculpatory evidence that supports Mr.
20 Peterson's claim that he is innocent, which appears to me was never investigated by law
21 enforcement
22 10. Attorneys from the Los Angeles Innocence Project contacted me in July 2023 and
23 informed me that they were preparing to file a motion for DNA testing on certain items of
24 evidence and a post-conviction discovery motion in an effort to further investigate Scott
25 Peterson's claim of innocence and what may have happened to Laci and Conner Peterson. They
26 explained that they were investigating recently uncovered evidence that pointed to other possible
21 suspects in the case. I agreed to speak with them regarding some of the information I have
28

3
1 uncovered in my own investigation. We agreed I would not reveal the names ofany sources who
2 spoke to me off the record and/or asked to remain anonymous.
3 11. I was specifically asked to discuss possible exculpatory evidence my investigation
4 uncovered and issues around the physical items of evidence that could be subjected to DNA
5 testing, including evidence collected from the orange van that was found on fire approximately
6 one mile from the Petersons• home on December 25, 2002, the morning after Laci disappeared,
7 and which was the subject of an inadequate vehicle fire investigation, in my opinion. I was also
8 asked to address what I uncovered when I investigated the date the home of Rudy and Susan
9 Medina was burglarized.
10 The Medina Home was Burglarized on December 24, 2002
11 12. My investigation revealed that there were a number of people involved in planned
12 burglaries in the La Loma neighborhood around the Christmas holiday in 2002. There was
13 coordination among several individuals who were carrying out these burglaries, including scouts
14 looking for police, looking for evidence of vacant homes by counting cars in driveways, and
15 looking for things like uncollected mail and/or newspapers.
16 13. My investigation also revealed evidence that there were more than two individuals
11 involved in burglarizing the Medinas' home, and that it took place over more than one day.
18 14. Evidence I have gathered in the course of my own investigation combined with
19 evidence gathered during the police investigation indicates to me that the Medinas' home was
20 burglarized on December 24, 2002, after Mr. Peterson left his home for the day.
21 15. Diane Jackson told police she saw three men and a van parked in front of the
22 Medinas' home on December24 at approximately 11:40 a.m. Ms. Jackson was not permitted to
23 testify at trial, however, because the Modesto Police detectives responsible for investigating the
24 case opted to place Ms. Jackson under hypnosis for an official interview and the individual who
25 hypnot:i7.ed her was not qualified to do so in an official capacity, so her testimony was deemed
26 inadmissible. I interviewed Diane Jackson and she confirmed to me that she still recalls the events
21 of that day and that all the statements she provided to police were true and accurate, i.e., the day
~
28
DECLARATION OF GEORGE MICHAEL GUOOELL

4
1 she saw the van parked in front of the Medinas' home with three men standing around it was on
2 December 24, at about 11:40 a.m
3 16. I also interviewed Linda Chilies, who was herself the widow of a Modesto Police
4 Department detective named Nick Chilies. Ms. Chilles confirmed to me that she reported to
s police in December 2002 that on the morning ofDecember 24, 2002, she was driving on Coveoa
6 and saw a suspicious looking van parked in front ofthe Medinas' home with three men standing
1 around it When I spoke to her, she informed me that no one from the Modesto Police Department
a ever contacted her to follow up with her on her report.
g 17. I interviewed Susan Medina, who told me she reported to police that the morning
10 ofDecember 24, as she and her husband were leaving town for the holiday, they saw a man on a
11 bike coming down their street as they were about to drive away. The man looked out of place
12 and caused Mr. Medina enough concern that he drove around the block to make sure the man had
13 moved along and was not still lurking arowid his home. Mrs. Medina stated that the police never
14 asked her if she could identify the man she had seen on a bike that morning.
1s 18. Both Rudy and Susan Medina also told me that the safe that was stolen from their
16 home was far too heavy for one person to carry alone, and that it would likely require three people
17 to lift and move it
1a 19. Based on reports I have reviewed, Steven Todd himself, who pleaded guilty to
19 committing the Medina burglary, was unclear about the date he burglarized the Medinas'
20 home. First, Todd told police in his initial interview upon arrest that he burglarized the house on
21 the morning ofDecember 27, which is not possible given that the Medina's had returned home a
22 day earlier and reported the burglary to police on December 26. Then, realizing a December 27
23 burglary was not possible, Todd changed his story and told police that he committed the burglary
24 in the early morning hours of December 26.
2s 20. However, as reported by my colleagues, by the morning of December 26, there
26 was already heavy media presence on Covena Avenue covering the disappearance of Laci
21 Peterson, making it an unlikely time to commit a burglary on that street. Covena Avenue is a
2a small, intimate street with homes that are relatively close to each other.

5
1 21. Based on my own experience of being present with other reporters on the street
2 where the Petersons and Medinas homes are located, it is difficult to believe a burglary of the
3 Medinas' home on December 26 would have gone unnoticed
4 22. I interviewed Steven Todd's co-defendant, Donald Glenn Pearce, on numerous
5 occasions, prior to his death. Pearce also pleaded guilty to the Medina burglary. He told police
6 he was awakened by Todd between 6:30 and 7:00 a.m. on December 26, who was asking him to
7 help Todd retrieve property from the Medina residence. That would place Todd and Pearce on
e Covena Avenue at or after 7:00 am. on December 26. Again, that account is very difficult to
9 believe because video news reports from that morning demonstrate that news media were
10 recording as early as 7:02 am. on December 26, as indicated by the screenshot of Ted Rowland's
11 report below:
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22 23. In my experience, for a news team to be broadcasting live at 7:00 a.m. from
23
Covena Avenue, they would had to have arrived there an hour or more earlier for staging in order
24 to set up lights, set up their satellite news vans, and test their cables and microphones for the
25
broadcast. Given the media presence on Covena Avenue on December 26, it is not plausible in
26
my opinion that the burglary occurred on December 26, as Todd and Pearce reported.
27 24. If Todd and Pearce were able to remove the safe from the Medinas' home on the
28
morning of December 26, as they claimed, it does not explain how, when, and by whom the

6
1 remaining fifty or so items stolen from the Medinas' home were removed, which included other
2 large items like a large tool chest and gardening equipment, among other items.
3 25. The more plausible scenario, based on my investigation and eyewitness accounts
4 of there being a van parked in front of the Medinas' home with three men standing around it the
s morning of December 24, 2002, is that there were multiple people in and out of the Medinas'
6 home, beginning on December 24, including Todd himself: and possibly continuing through the
1 morning ofDecember 26, if that is in fa.ct when Todd and Pearce moved the safe.
a 26. Steven Todd told police that he was with Cliff Koen on December 24, 2002, and
9 that he was not on Covena Avenue at all that day, as proofthat he did not commit the burglary on
10 that date. In 2015, I interviewed Telesia Koen. CliffKoen's daughter. Telesia Koen told me that
11 in December 2002, she was Jiving in the Airport District at 612 Thrasher, and that she is the sister
12 ofMelissa McDaniels, who was the mother of Steven Todd, Jr., Steven Todd's son. The location
13 of Telesia Koen's home is directly adjacent to an alley where a van was set on fire early the
14 morning of December 25, 2002, addressed below.
1s 27. My investigation uncovered evidence that the police did not investigate Steven
16 Todd's account about where he went and what he did during the three-day period when the
11 Medinas were away between December 24 and December 26, 2002.
1a 28. On October 26, 2015, I spoke to Det. Stough of the Modesto Police Department
19 who led the investigation into the Medina burglary. I specifically asked him about statements he
20 had made at a press conference on January 3, 2003, confirming that Todd and Pearce had been
21 cleared of any involvement in Laci Peterson's disappearance. When I asked him about what
22 efforts were made to verify Steven Todd's alibi for December 24, the day Laci went missing, Det.
23 Stough told me they didn't check where Steven Todd was that day, that he expected Todd would
24 not tell the truth: "You expect that kind of stuff from criminals. It's expected, and all these
2s jailhouse snitches and all these other people, you know meth addicts can oo--they wi11 tell
26 themselves lies enough that they will believe it. they truly, truly believe it."
21 29. I asked Det Stough if anyone checked the address that Todd provided to the police
2s as part of his ahb~ and he told me he did not know. My investigation showed~ e s s

7
1 Todd provided as his alibi had flooded and was uninhabitable, empty, and dilapidated in
2 December 2002.
3 30. Sources have told me that Steven Todd was a daily user of methamphetarnine and
4 other drugs. Todd himself admitted during his police interview on January 3, 2003, that he was
s a daily drug user. And, according to a sworn declaration I reviewed by an investigator for the
6 defense that was signed in 2015, Todd admitted to him in 2004 that he was "so high on meth and
1 crack for three days that [he didn't] remember anything [he did]," referring to the ~day period
a from December 24-26.
9 31. Based on my review of the evidence and my own independent follow-up
10 investigation, there appears to be no reliable source of information supporting the
11 prosecution's theory the Medinas' home was not burglarized on December 24 and was instead
12 burglarized on December 26.
13 32. My investigation uncovered additional evidence supporting Det. Stough's
14 admission that the l\1PD did not investigate the reliability of Todd's statements to police. For
1s example, Todd told police that on December 25, he was visiting his kids at a house on Tioga
16 Drive, where his kids were then living. My research revealed, however, that the residence Todd
11 was describing was that of his ex-wife, Elizabeth Garcia. located at 1131 Tioga Drive. Property
1a records associated with that address indicate that Todd's ex-wife and kids no longer lived at that
19 address in December 2002, because that area of Modesto had experienced severe flooding and
20 the residence was abandoned. It therefore appears to me that the police never looked into the
21 reliability of Todd's alibi for December 25, which was false.
22 33. I have reviewed the content of a statement sent to Scott Peterson in 2012 or 2013,
23 by an individual named Danny Chapman. Chapman apparently stated to Mr. Peterson that he was
24 in custody at the Modesto Security Center together with a person I will identify as D .M I who
25 knew Steven Todd. Chapman reported to Scott that: (i) Todd told D.M. he had been burglarizing
26 homes in the neighborhood where the Petersons and Medinas lived in December 2002; and (ii)
27
The D.M. referenced in Danny Chapman's letter is the same DM. whose identity is currently
28 redacted in Mr. Peterson's 2023 Habeas Petition, which is currently being litigated in the California Court
ofAppeal.

8
1 Todd told D.M. that when he was committing the burglary, Todd believed Laci saw him, so he
2 called D.M. and asked for a ride so he could get everything out of the house before Laci could
3 call the police. Danny Chapman also informed Mr. Peterson that D.M told him that ''Todd and
4 company" abducted Laci, but he did not provide details about when or where, or how he knew
s that infonµation.
6 34. I was unsuccessful in my attempts to locate Danny Chapman to interview him over
7 several years; he is now deceased
a 3S. To investigate the reliability of Mr. Chapman's statements to Mr. Peterson, I
9 independently investigated the information he provided by personally contacting D.M. in
10 2015. D.M. confirmed to me that Todd called him from inside the Medina home and asked him
11 to come assist with getting the things he was stealing out ofthe Medinas' home because he needed
12 to do it fast. DM also confirmed that the call from Todd came on the day of''Christmas Eve"
13 (December 24). D.M. confirmed that he knew Danny Chapman and asked me how he was doing.
14 36. In 2019, I exchanged letters with Ralph Guerra when he was in prison. I had heard
1s from several sources that Ralph was a confidential informant and the person who called the police
16 and reported that Steven Todd was responsible for the Medina burglary. Ralph did not deny the
17 rumors.
1s 37. Based on the information I uncovered in my years-long investigation into the date
19 the Medinas' home was burglarized, I have concluded: (i) the police never confirmed the
20 truthfulness of Todd and Stevens alibis for December 24 to ensure they were truthful; (ii) there is
21 evidence there were multiple burglaries that were carried out. by several different individuals,
22 beginning on December 24; and, (iii) there is no credible or reliable evidence supporting the
23 prosecution's claim that the burglary was not committed on December 24, but was instead
24 committed on December 26, 2002 and only on December 26.
2s Orange "Cal Trans" Van in La Loma Park on December 24, 2002
26 38. In 2003, I was investigating a report I had come across about a van that had been
27 set on fire in the Airport District early Christmas morning, December 25, 2002, just hours after
28

9
1 Laci Peterson was discovered missing. The van was set on fire while parked in an alley behind
2 the home ofTelesiaKoen, the aunt of Steven Todd, Jr.
3 39. One of the individuals who investigated the fire was MFD Fire Investigator Bryan
4 Spitulski, so I contacted him in 2015. When I explained to Mr. Spitulski that I wanted to ask him
s questions about the burned van he investigated around the time that Laci Peterson went missing,
6 he stated that he had been waiting for over ten years for someone to come and ask him about that.
7 40. Mr. Spitulski explained that the vehicle fire involved an orange 1989 Chevrolet
e Van with a mattress in the back, license plate number 6S66512 and that his examination of the
9 vehicle concluded that the fire was intentionally set.
10 41. After I interviewed Mr. Spitulski, it appeared to me there was information missing
11 in the police reports I had obtained. There were no police reports indicating there had been an
12 investigation into the bumed van. I showed Mr. Spitulski the reports I had available to me and
13 he stated that he believed there should be more investigation reports and photographs than what
14 I had shown him.
15 42. Mr. Spitulski told me that in his examination of the vehicle and its contents, he
16 saw that the mattress in the rear passenger area had visible red-brown staining on a portion that
11 was unburned. He recalled that a presumptive test using Luminol or a similar chemical was
10 conducted on a cutting from the stained area of the mattress and it showed to be presumptive
19 positive for the presence ofblood.
20 43. He stated that he was not aware that Laci Peterson was missing at the time he
21 responded to the fire the morning of December 25, 2002, but by the time the van was taken into
22 police custody to be examined for evidence, he and all of law enforcement were aware of a
23 possible connection between the van and Laci Peterson's disappearance.
24 44. Mr. Spitulski expressed that given the proximity both in terms oftime and location
2s ofthe discovery ofthe van with Laci Peterson's disappearance, coupled with the fact that the fire
26 was intentionally set, perhaps for the purpose of covering up a crime, he was concerned and
21 bothered by the failure to fully investigate its potential link to her disappearance.
28

10
1 45. I noticed a reference in one of the police reports to "6 color photos" that were
2 reportedly checked into MPD evidence so I began making efforts to obtain those photos. I
3 contacted some of my sources in law enforcement, asking if anyone could help me obtain the
4 photos and other information about the orange van.
5 46. In late 2015 or early 2016, a source who asked to remain anonymous sent me the
6 six color photos below:
7
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
r t
\
J
~ "'lll
.
~,...j
~ ,,,
·ti••·•J.♦'•· ,..♦•♦
♦
l
.. •
17 '
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

11
1 47. I later provided a copy ofthese photos to a member of Mr. Peterson' s legal team
2 because I was having medical issues and I wanted to ensure that the information I had was known
3 to the defense and could be made a part of the record so it would be complete.
4 48. When I was investigating the orange van in 2003, I learned that the registered
s owner ofthe van was Terry Borden, so I comacted him at his property on Service Road and asked
6 to interview him. I was immediately struck by the obvious criminal element present on his
1 property. I recall seeing a number of men and women there with obvious gang tattoos, who were
8 employees of Borden's Moving and Rigging. While I was made to feel unwelcome by several
9 employees on the property, the owner did agree to speak with me.
10 49. When I asked him about his van that was stolen and set on fire on Christmas in
11 2002, Borden indicated that it was an "inside job" meaning that one of his own employees had
12 stolen the vehicle. This struck me as significant in that if the van was taken by one of Borden's
13 own employees, the logical reason for setting the van on fire would be to destroy evidence in it
u in order to cover up a crime it was used in the commission of since, if evidence inside it were to
15 be discovered, it could easily be linked back to one of the employees.
16 50. I later learned that a man named Phillip Lout was part of the criminal network
11 associated with burglaries in La Loma, including Todd and others I suspected may have been
18 involved in the Medina burglary. I learned that Lout was the son-in-law of Teny Borden I
19 attempted to interview Lout but was unable to do so; he was in prison in Oklahoma Lout is now
2o deceased.
21 51. In 2017, after learning more about the orange van that was intentionally set on fire
22 in the Airport District on December 25, 2002, and reviewing a police report documenting an
23 interview with Mike Chiavetta, who told police on December 26, 2002, that two days earlier, on
24 the morning of December 24, 2002, he was out running in the East La Loma Park and recalled
25 seeing an orange "Cal Trans" blazer-type vehicle parked near the tennis courts, I contacted Mr.
26 Chiavetta and interviewed him.
27 52. I asked Mr. Chiavetta if he recalled reporting that he had seen as 15-year--old
28 orange blazer-type vehicle with square headlights that resembled an old Cal Trans vehicle in La
DECLARATION OF GEORGE MIOIAEL OUDGELL V"(fi-'

12
1 Loma Park the morning of December 24, 2002. Mr. Chiavetta immediately stated, "Oh, that
2 creepy van. That gave me bad vibes." He did not descnbe the vehicle as a "blazer," but, instead,
3 as a "van." He said that there were three men that he described as "gang bangers" around the
4 van, When recalling the van, he displayed a physical reaction to the memory of the van,
5 unconsciously mimicking both fear and shock I found his reaction to be very authentic and
6 believable, as if he was having a visceral reaction to the memory as it was coming back to him.
7 53. I asked Mr. Chiavetta where in the park he saw the van, and he explained that it
a was near the tennis courts on the east end of the park. The map below depicts the location of the
9 van as indicated by Mr. Chiavetta:
10
11
12
Ch_!!vette Orange
13 Van Sighting 12/24
14
15
16
I
Peterson Home
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
Modesto
27
Burned Orange
28 Van 12/25

13
1 54. Mr. Cbiavetta told me that no one from the police department ever contacted him
2 to follow up on bis report about seeing the orange van in the park on December 24, 2002.
J 55. Based on my experience and the results of my 21-year-long investigation into this
4 case, I am surprised that law enforcement did not do a more to investigate the evidence recovered
5 from the orange van that was set on fire in the Airport District of Modesto the morning of
6 December 25, 2002, and possible related crimes.
1 56. In my investigation into that crime, I was unable to uncover any evidence
a indicating that the Modesto Police Department made a serious effort to make any arrest in that
9 crime, or even find suspects who may have been involved or others with knowledge of the
10 circwnstances surrounding that crime. Nor did police investigate whether the orange van had a
11 possible connection to the abduction ofLaci Peterson and/or use in any other crimes. In my view,
12 the van's links to criminal elements in the community and the timing and circumstances of its
13 discovery in relation to the disappearance of Laci Peterson leave a lot of unanswered questions
14 that law enforcement investigators failed to pursue.
15 Scent Dog Evidence
16 57. I also reviewed police reports detailing the immediate efforts undertaken to locate
11 Laci after she was reported missing, including the use ofscent dogs to trail her scent on December
1s 26, 2002. My review of those scent dog reports indicates to me that the scent trail detected by
19 Merlin, the bloodhound handled by Contra Costa County Sheriff's Department Reserve Officer
20 Cindee Valentin, went from the Petersons' home in the direction of the area the Airport District
21 not far from 1406 Tenaya, where Todd and Pearce lived and where they were both arrested. Both
22 admitted to committing the Medina burglary. The trail Merlin followed also ended very close to
23 the homes of other suspects I believe may have been involved in the Medina burglary.
24 58. I personally walked the route where Cindee Valentin documented her dog Merlin
25 had trailed Laci Peterson's scent. I observed that a few blocks further east from where Merlin
26 was told to stop trailing is where the burned orange van was located in the alleyway behind
21 Thrasher. Valentin testified that Merlin lost the scent and she stopped the search at the Gallo
2a parking lot.

14
1 59. Based on my review of Mr. Peterson' s statement to police, he left home the
2 morning ofDecember 24 and drove west to his office, but Merlin did not trail Laci' s scent in the
3 direction of the route Mr. Peterson reported taking to his office and warehouse the morning of
4 December 24, 2002. Instead, the trail went south toward the Airport District area, toward the area
5 where Todd, Pearce, and others I suspect were involved in the Medina burglary lived and where
6 the burned orange van was located.
7 60. Depicted below is a map indicating the route Scott told police he took to his
8 office/warehouse on December 24 (in blue) and Laci' s scent trail Merlin picked up on December
9 26 (in red). I walked the route indicated in red below and was struck by how, although the trails
10 led to the Airport District, law enforcement ignored this evidence even though it tended to
11 corroborate a connection between the burglary, the burned van, and Laci's disappearance.
12 ._,
ro
IO E Mon is Ave
13 (I)
14
:r-
sct,n,c Dr
j Peterson Home I
15
16
17
MO destO •~ Bloodhounds 12h6 Route 1,:-"'
18 '--,;/
~----
Burglary Suspect
19
20
21
22
23
1 00
24
61. Based on my decades of experience as an investigative journalist and my
25
independent investigation into the facts and evidence this case, it does not appear that MPD
26
conducted a meaningful investigation into the date ofthe Medina burglary, whether Steven Todd
27
saw Laci Peterson the morning of December 24 after Mr. Peterson left home for the day, or the
28
orange van being possibly connected to Laci's disappearance and murder. ¥
J<r(U
DECLARATION OF GEORGE MICHAEL GUDGELL •
15
l 62. As a result, the jury did not hear any evidence concerning the burned van, nor did
2 the jury hear that there were possible bloodstains observed on the mattress in the back of the
3 burned van, or that the orange van was observed at the park morning she disappeared, or that the
4 following day, an orange van fitting that same description was found on fire at a location not far
s from where Todd lived, or that Merlin trailed Laci,s scent in the direction of the neighborhood
6 where Todd lived, as well as others I suspect were involved in the Medina burglary, and where
1 the burned orange van was located the morning after Laci disappeared.
8 Eyewitness who Reported Seeing Laci Peterson and/or McKenzi on December 24, 2002
9 63. I interviewed the following eyewitnesses, who reported to the police that they had
10 seen Laci Peterson walking a dog in the La Loma neighborhood the morning ofDecember 24, or
11 in some instances the witnesses saw only the Petersons' dog (McKenzi) without Laci, but whose
12 reports were not seriously investigated, or in some instances not investigated at all.
13 64. In 2013, Leora Garcia reported to me that she saw a tan van pulled over along the
14 curb at a La Loma Park entrance, not far from where other eyewitnesses reported seeing Laci
1s Peterson walking that morning. The van.'s tires squealed when the van pulled away and the door
16 was shut quickly, leaving a quilted coat or blanket sticking out of the door. Ms. Garcia told me
17 she also saw a dog that fit the description of the Petersons' dog, dragging a red leash, with no one
18 else around Leora Garcia struck me as a very reliable witness because she seemed to pay great
19 attention to detail. She was a driving instructor at the time, and she was in a car with a student
20 driver, so her primary duty at the time she observed what she reported was to be surveying the
21 surroundings to ensure her student driver was not heading toward any harm. I found Ms. Garcia
22 to be very credible.
23 65. In 2015,Victoria Pouches also reported to police that she had seen a dog fitting the
24 description of the Petersons' dog when she was jogging in La Loma Park the morning of
2s December 24, 2002. When I interviewed Ms. Pouches, I asked her if she was certain it was the
26 Petersons' dog she saw that morning and she stated that she was certain.
21 66. I spent several years trying to track down John Brazil, a man who worked for the
28 City Parks Department and who was in and arotmd La Loma Park almost every da~ . He

16
1 was in La Loma Park on December 24 because some kids had asked him to put nets up on the
2 basketball courts on his day off and he agreed to do so. He reported to police that he saw a golden
3 lab dragging its leash go by with a woman he thought was pregnant following behind I was
4 finally able to interview Mr. Brazil by telephone in 2016. I asked him if he believed the woman
s was Laci Peterson and he stated that he knew the Rochas, and specifically knew Laci and Brent
6 Rocha, because they were involved in student activities when they were younger. Mr. Brazil told
1 me the woman he saw with the dog on December 24, 2002, very well couJd have been Laci
8 Peterson: "In my gut I believe it was Laci."
9 67. In 2013, I interviewed Gene Pedrioli, who reported to the police that he had seen
10 Laci Peterson walking a dog near the park entrance at Edgebrook and La Loma, which is a
11 location I knew was near where other witnesses reported seeing Laci that morning. Mr. Pedrioli
12 told me Laci was having trouble controlling the dog and she had kind of a scared look on
13 her. When Mr. Pedrioli saw the news and photo of Laci, reporting that she was missing and that
14 no one had seen her since December 23, he went to the police station to report that he had seen
15 her walking her dog the morning of December 24. He told me the police were not interested in
16 hearing what he had to say so he left and did not go back. I reviewed an email dated February 2,
17 2003, that Mr. Pedrioli's co-worker sent to the email address that was set up to help find Laci
18 Peterson, stating that Mr. Pedrioli attempted to report what he had seen to the police but no one
19 seemed interested in bearing it Mr. Pedrioli is now deceased. The email is below:
20 regarding: Possible sighting of Laci Peterson •
message: I work with a guy that says he seen her on the morning of her dissapearance. He lives close to
21 where she lived. He says he seen her standing by the west side of the park with the dog. It was In the
momlng. He told me he went to the police station and reported it but no one seemed to take it seriously. If
22 he could show you the spot he says he seen her there may be some sort of clue or evidence sUII there.
His name is Gene Pedrioli and his home phone number Is -
23
Trial Prosecutor Fladager & MPD Lead Det. Craig Grogan
24
68. Because Mr. Peterson's trial was moved from Modesto to Redwood City, both trial
25
teams had to try the case away from home. The prosecution team and law enforcement witnesses
26
tended to stay at one hotel, the Marriott Residence Inn, while the defense team stayed at other
27
28

17
1 hotels. I was hopeful to establish a relationship with the prosecution and detectives, so I purposely
2 stayed at the Marriott Residence Inn.
3 69. Over the six months I .was staying at the hotel, I frequently saw trial prosecutor
4 Birgit Fladager and Det. Craig Grogan together, apart from others. I noticed interactions between
s them that appeared to be progressively fami1iar, such as unnecessary touching and smiling, than
6 what one typically sees among professional colleagues. The interactions I observed appeared to
7 become more and more obvious ov.er time. At some point, I started noticing similar interactions
a in court I heard other detectives speculating as to why Grogan was staying at the hotel away
9 from home for months. Later, toward the end of trial, I was told by colleagues that there were
10 rumors they had a romantic relationship.
11 70. I later confirmed with a person who had personal knowledge ofthe affair between
12 Fladager and Grogan that the two were engaged in an extra-marital affair and that some of Det.
13 Grogan's friends and colleagues were actuaUy concerned about how the affair was affecting him
14 personally and emotionally.
15 71. I have reviewed this declaration in its entirety and it is accurate to the best of my
17 the foregoing is true and correct
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

18
EXHIBIT 9
EXHIBIT
Declaration of Bryan
Bryan Spitulski
Spitulski
Declaration of Bryan Spltulski
2 I, Bryan Spitulski, hereby declare under penalty of perjury that the following is true
3 and accurate to the best of my knowledge:
4 l . I am currently employed as a Principal Consultant specializing in fire investigations
5 with Envista Forensics. I have over 20 years of experience in fire investigations.
6 2. From 1999 - 2003, J was employed with the Modest Fire Department as a Fire
7 Investigator.
8 3. ln July 2023, I was contacted by attorneys with the Los Angeles Innocence Project.
9 They explained that they were investigating a vehicle fire that I had investigated which
10 occurred around the time of the investigation into the disappearance of Laci Peterson. I
11 agreed to speak with them regarding what I remembered.
12
612 Thrasher Ave. Vehicle Fire Scene
13
14
4. On December 25, 2002, I was contacted around 8:30 a.m. regarding a vehicle fire in the
15
Airport District area of Modesto.
16
S. At this time, Modesto, and particularly the Airport District, was notorious for vehicle
11
thefts and fires. Over the years, I had responded to several tires involving Molotov
18
cocktails or fires classified as attempted murders reported in the Airport District of
19
Modesto.
20
6. At the time I responded to the call I was unaware of the missing person investigation
21
into Laci Peterson, who had been reported missing the prior evening.
22
7. When I arrived at the scene, the fire had been extinguished and the vehicle was stilJ
23
lightly smoking. The vehicle was facing south in an alleyway located between Thrasher
24
Avenue and Empire Avenue, north of Lark.in Avenue. The fire engine that responded
25
to the scene prior to my arrival approached from the north end of the alley way. I
26
approached from the south. The blue pin on the map below depicts the vehicles
approximate location:
27
28
DECLARATlON OP BRYAN SPm.Jl.SKJ

I
El
1
or.gon Or OregonDt o-.nOr
'
2
ALMBC
3
9 uuo~ 120969505
4 0
8
In
9 "'
3
11
;
10 >
i
11 Lotkln '4w L•lun /4ve
12
13
8. The vehicle was an orange 1989 Chevrolet van with a license plate number 6S66512. The
14
van is depicted in the photograph below:
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
21
28
OECLARATION OF BRYAN SPITULSKI

2
1 9. As a fire investigator on the scene, my role was to detennine the origin and cause of the fire.
2 I recall consulting with Capt Jolly who infonned me that there were no witnesses around, but
J that a neighbor had called the fire in. He further infonned me that the decision to call in a fire
4 investigator was in part based on the fact that a rag was sticking out of the fuel tank. Although
5 this did not appear to be the origin of the fire, it did tend to indicate the fire was intentionally
6 set and therefore warranted an investigation.
, 10. I recall speaking with the reporting party, who resided at 612 Thrasher Avenue. The reporting
8 party informed me that they did not recognize the van and that they did not recall the van
9 being present in the alleyway when they went to sleep the night before. Aside from speaking
10 with the reporting party, we did not conduct any further canvas of the neighborhood for
11 witnesses to the tire. This was in part due to the timing of the fire being on Christmas morning,
12 and also due to the location of the fire in the Airport District, a neighborhood notorious for
13 crime.
14 11. Based upon my observations and my experience and expertise, I opined that this was an
15 incendiary fire, meaning that it was intentionally set and not the resuJt of natural causes. I
16 based this conclusion, in part, on evidence of two separate ignition points and corresponding
11 bum patterns-one in the front of the vehicle and one in the rear cabin-which indicated that
18 the fire was set in at least two locations in/on the vehicle. I also observed that the gas cap for
19 the fuel tank was lying on the ground near the vehicle and a rag had been placed into the
20 opening for the fuel tank and was hanging down the side of the vehicle, but it was not burned
21 and was not the origin point of the fire.
22 12. Part of my role as a fire investigator was also to detennine whether there was evidence that
23 the vehicle was stolen and stripped of parts before being burned. With the exception of the
24 battery, the vehicle had generally not been stripped for parts typically sold or sought after in
25 vehicle thefts, such as the radio, wheels, and lug nuts. I also observed driver's side door lock
26 was intact.
27 13. I was unable to detennine whether the key was present in the ignition. As I recall, the ignition
28 area of the vehicle was severely damaged. Often in a vehicle fire, the ignition, which is
DECLARATION OF BRYAN SPITULSKI

3
II
1 typically made ofaluminum and zinc, can completely melt and fonn a metal glob on the floor
2 of the driver's area. I recall that being the case with this vehicle, making it not possible to
3 detennine whether the key was present.

4 14. In my experience as a fire investigator, when a vehicle is intentionally set on fire, there are a
s number of typical motivations for doing so, including insurance purposes or, if the vehicle
6 was involved in crime, to dispose of evidence of that crime. I recall thinking that this vehicle
7 fire appeared to be unusual in that the vehicle had not been stripped for parts. The radio and
8 tires were in tact and the tires, which appeared to be matching and in reasonably good
9 condition, were still on the vehicle. Additionally, our investigation later showed that the
10 owner only had liability insurance on the vehicle, which indiacted to me that a possible
11 motivation for this vehicle fire was the disposal of evidence of a crime.
12 15. As a part of my investigation into this vehicle fire, as indicated in my report, I produced
13 photographs, scene diagrams, and a report. I recall producing a scene diagram in this case
14 which depicted the location of the van, its orientation in the alleyway, and other objects within
1s the alleyway.
16 16. Typically, I would take my own scene photographs. Attached to my report are two sheets of
11 thumbnails of digital photographs I took at the scene. It was my practice to upload
10 photographs to the department's database for storage. This case occurred around the
19 department's transition from film photography to digital photography. During this transition,
20 it was common for both digital and film photographs to be taken at a scene. I do not recall
21 whether any film photographs of this scene were taken in addition to the digital photographs
22 attached as thumbnails to my report.
23 17. I recall that while on the scene I requested the assistance of a CSO, or community service
24 officer, to assist with processing the scene, but was informed that none were available at the
2s time. Subsequently, I made the determination to have the vehicle towed to a secure location
26 for processing at a later date.
21 l 8. I recall that as part of my initial examination at the scene, I examined the interior of the van.
20 I recall observing a burnt mattress in the rear of the van at this time. Situated on the mattress
DECLARATION OF BRYAN SPITULSKJ

4
.-
1 was a large metal can. I do not recall moving the metal cannister located on top of the mattress
2 at this time. Below is a photograph depicting the interior of tbe van:
3
"J
8
g
10
11
12
13
14
1s
16
17
16 19. While at the scene, I wore my work gloves while handling any evidence. I do not recall
19 collecting any evidence on December 25, 2002. lnstead, to my best recollection, items, such
20 as the rag hanging from the fuel tank, were secured inside the vao while it was being towed
21 to A&R Towing. I recall that we picked this specifi c tow yard because it was fenced in and
22 under surveillance in order to protect the integrity of the vehicle which was still under
23 investigation.
24 20. My initial report lists an individual named "Mark F- • as a. name to appear in the report,
2S but bis name is not mentioned in the body of the report. I do not recall who this individual
was or what his connec1ion to the case was.
21 21 . Within a couple of days, I became aware ofthe missing person investigation for Laci Peterson.
28 J became aware that police were looking for infonnation regarding a van associated with a
OECLAAATJON OF BRYAN SPITULSKJ

s
1
burglary that occurred across the street from the Peterson home around the time Laci Peterson
2
was reported missing. When I heard this, I immediately thought about the van fire I had
3 • • th
mvestigated on December 25 . I contacted Modesto Police Department Del. Shipley to
4 conduct further investigation.
5
Interview with Owner Terry Border' /.i7
6
"7 22. On December 3 I, 2002, I accompanied Det. Shipley to the business property ofTerry Borden,
8 the registered owner of the van. I recall there being several people present during the
9 interview. Initially upon our arrival, I recall the people there knew we were law enforcement
10 and did not want to talk to us.
11 23. I remember the Borden property being an intimidating place. I recall there being several men
12 hanging around the property and Det. Shipley infonned me of the criminal history of some of
13 the people associated with the property. I do not recall whether or how they identified
14 themselves. I did not get the impression that they were all members ofBorden's family. They
15 also did not strike me as official employees, but instead just sort of men that were hanging
16
around the compound.
1 "7
24. I recall that while Det. Shipley was interviewing the owner, I was accompanied by another
18 individual who showed me where the van should have been parked. I recall trying to determine
19
how the vehicle could have been stolen from the property and thinking that someone would
20
have to be an idiot to try to steal from the Borden property. I recall there being dogs on chains,
and it was just all around an intimidating place.
21
25. J recall Teny Borden indicating that he was not aware of a mattress being in the back of the
22
van when it was last in his possession.
23
26. Det. Shipley took the lead on taking witness statements. While I am aware that his report
24
indicates that he conducted a search of an individual and his residence, I do not believe I was
25
present for that search.
26
Ill
2"7
Ill
28
DECLAR.ATION OF BRYAN SPITULSKI

6
l Discovery of Stains on Mattress
2
27. On December 31, 2002, after interviewing the owner and obtaining a warrant to search the
3
van, I accompanied Det. Shipley to the tow yard where the van had been stored. Modesto
4
Police Department Evidence Technician Lovell might have also been present at the tow yard,
5
but I do not specifically recall.
6
28. To the best ofmy recollection, while at the tow yard, J entered the vehicle removed the metal
1
cannister fonn the mattress, and discovered that there were red-brown stains on the unburnt
8
portion of the mattress. I recall feeling a sense of anxiety at seeing the stain and I stiU get
9
goosebumps now when I think about it. At this point, the search for Laci Peterson was at the
10
forefront of everyone's minds, and discovering these stains in this burnt van found within
11
hours of her disappearance was shocking.
12
29. The stained mattress and metal canister are depicted below:
13
l4
15
16
l7
18
19
20
2l
22
23
24
25
26
21
28

7
1 30. Upon observing the stains, we decided to have the vehicle brought to the Modesto Police
2 Department Evidence and Property Locker for further processing.
3
Transporting and Processing Van at Evidence Locker
4
31 . Because the search for Laci Peterson was national news at this point, and because the police
5
had released a statement indicating they were looking for a van related to a burglary across
6
the street, we took extra precautions to avoid having the van spotted by the media while en
7
route to the evidence locker. We covered the van with a tarp during transport, and drove a
8
route that avoided the media staked-out outside the police department, as indicated by the map
9
below, and put the van in a warehouse with a close door for further processing:
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21 32. Once at the evidence locker, 1 began processing the van. This was a more thorough processing
22 than what had occurred at the tow yard. I recall digging out the floorboard of the van and
23 removing the mattress materials. J believe some portions of the van were examined for
24 fingerprint evidence, but none were located.
25
33. I recall additional photographs of the processing of the van were taken at the evidence locker.
26
I would have been taking my own photographs, and I recall someone from MPD taking photos
27 as well.
28 Ill

8
• .....
1 34. I recall cutting three samples from the mattress fabric. To the best of my recollection, the
2 portions I collected consisted of two small cuttings ofstained areas and one control cutting of
3 a non-stained area. I believe the stained samples I cut are the two small holes cut from the
4 middJe and the control sample I collected from the edge of the fabric, as indicated by the
s yellow circles in the photograph below:
6
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
11
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
21 35. I did not take the photo depicted above. The attorneys I spoke to from the Los Angeles
2s Innocence Project infonned me that the photograph above was taken in 2019 in conjunction
OECLAR.A TION OF BRYAN SPITULSKI

9
--
1 with testing that was conducted at that time and that the letters "A" and "B" that are
2 superimposed on the photo were placed onto the photo to indicate the areas where samples
3 were collected for DNA testing in 2019. I believe separate photographs of the process ofmy
4 cutting of samples from the mattress cloth in 2003 would also have been taken.
s 36. To my recollection, I selected the stained samples from two areas where the staining appeared
6 to be heaviest. Of the two, I deliberately chose the heavier stained sample to be subjected to
; a presumptive test for blood to give the best chance of indicating whether blood was present.
8 This sample was placed into a vial for presumptive testing. The vial turned blue indicating a
9 positive reaction for blood. The vial and the positive reaction of the presumptive test are
10 depicted below:
11
12
13
14
15
16
li
18
19
37. I am not sure what happened to the second sample cutting and the control cutting that I
20
collected.
21
38. It is my practice to wear gloves when entering a crime scene, including a burnt vehicle, and,
22
to the best of my recollection, myself and the others processing the van wore gloves when we
23
entered the vehicle and handled the evidence therein.
24
39. I recall that once the presumptive test indicated positive for blood, the face of the evidence
25
technician conducting the test went white and everyone present at the evidence locker went
26
ballistic. The people observing the testing started getting onto their phones to report what we
21
28
DECLARATION OF 8RYAN SPITULSKJ

JO
II
.. -- -
1 had found. This was such a big deal that the police chief, city manager, and fire chiefall came
2 down to the evidence locker to view the evidence.

3 • pomt,
40. At this • the:r"'
M!left-<: ~pmorphed mto
~ "'"?«fl.e bad • a m1ss10g
• • person case, and controI o fthe case
6 .
4 and its investigation were taken over by the Modesto Police Department
5
DOJLab
6
41. I recall personally taking the stained mattress fabric to be tested at the DOJ lab in Ripon. I
, recall that typically this lab was very busy. When we would submit evidence to test for the
e presence of an accelerant in an arson case, we would sometimes have to wait over a year for
9
results.
10
42. l specifical1y recall taking the samples and banding them over to a woman that worked at the
11
lab who was also a volunteer tire fighter in Ripon. J have reviewed the handwritten submission
12
forms associated with this transaction. My name is erroneously spelled and the form
13
incorrectly states that I was with the Modesto Police Department.
14
43. These fonns also incorrectly indicate that the sample was tested in front ofme with a negative
15
result for blood. I did not witness any testing conducted on the mattress samples while at the
16
DOJ lab. I only dropped the sealed samples off and then left.
17
Conclusion
18
44. I left the Modesto Fire Department not long after my involvement in this case. I agreed to
19
talk about my observations and the evidence I collected and examined related to this vehicle
20
fire because I have been deeply troubled about what I viewed to be an insufficient
21
investigation into the possibility of this vehicle fire being related in some way to the
22
disappearance of Laci Peterson.
23
Ill
24
Ill
25
Ill
26
Ill
27
Ill
28
Ill
DECLARATION OP BRYAN SPITULSKJ

II
■
• --
1 45. ln my opinion, given the presumptive positive test for blood on the mattress in the back of the
2 van, which was found the morning after Laci Peterson's disappearance not far from her home,
3 and which was intentionally set on firt>--perhaps to conceal evidence of a crime, a much more
4 in-depth investigation should have been conducted into who was responsible for the theft and
s burning of the van.
6 I have reviewed this declaration in its entirety and it is accurate to the best of my
7 knowledge. l declare under penalty of perjury pursuant to the laws ofthe State of California, that
s the foregoing is true and correct.
10 Date
11
12
13
14
1S
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
25
26
27
28

12
EXHIBIT 10
EXHIBIT
Declaration of Homer Maldonado
1 Declaration of Homer Maldonado
2 I, Socorro Homer Maldonado, hereby declare under penalty of perjury that the
3 following is true and accurate to the best ofmy knowledge:
4 1. I am a retired commercial painter. My wife, Helen (who goes by the name Sue), and I
5 have been married for 60 years and we have lived in our house on Phoenix Street in
6 Modesto, California for the last 27 years.
7 2. In September 2023, attorneys from the Los Angeles Innocence Project contacted me and
8 explained that they were investigating the case of Scott Peterson. The attorneys asked me
9 if I would talk to them about what I saw and what I reported seeing oo December 24, 2002
10 related to the disappearance of Laci Peterson, and I agreed. The attorneys visited our
11 home first oo September 13, 2023, and we spoke a short while out on our front porch but
12 we bad company at the time so we agreed to meet again in a few days to pick up where
13 we left off. We met again on September 15, 2023.
14 December 241 2002
3. On the morning of December 24, 2002, my wife Sue and I left home about 9:30 a. m. to
16 head out to do some shopping and drop off a Christmas present to a co-worker. Before
17 we got into the car, we stopped and talked to one ofour neighbors for a few minutes and
18 gave them their Christmas gift, which is something we did every year on Christmas Eve.
19 After that, we got into our Chevy station wagon and went on our way. Our first stop was
20 at the USA Mini-Mart gas station located at the comer of Camellia and Miller Avenue,
21 where we stopped to get gas. I recall that the gas station was busy and there were cars
22 waiting in lfoe to get gas. I got out of the car to pwnp gas while Sue went inside the store
23 to buy some lottery tickets.
24 4. The "USA Mini-Mart gas station" later became the "BZ Mart gas station" but the photo
25 attached as Exh. A generally shows the layout of the gas station as it appeared in 2002,
26 when we stopped for gas on December 24.
27
28
DECLARATION OP HOMER MALDONADO

I
j, HfY\,
1 5. I recall that I was parked at gas pump No. 1 and there was a tao van parked on the other
2 side of the island at pump No. 2. The diagram attached as Exh. B shows the location of
3 my car in relation to where the tan van was parked.
4 6. 1 worked for the Painters & Allied Trades Union at the time and com.muted back and forth
5 to AJameda, so I commuted about 1,000 miles per week and was constantly noticing
6 different types of vehicles on the road. The tan van I saw on December 24, 2002 at the
1 USA Mini-Mart gas station was unlike any van I had ever seen. The paint was dull, like
8 it had been on the road for a while. It had a chrome ladder on right rear door going from
9 the bumper to the roof, a chrome roof rack on top, and a tire mounted on the left rear door
10 with a cover that had a chrome rim with the rest of the cover painted the same color as the
11 ( 1\""
van. The van had windows in the back with white curtains partially covering them and \J P
12 windo\\:S't)n the passenger side in the rear portion of the van with curtains covering that
13 window.
14 7. The attorneys showed me photos of several different styles of vans and asked me if any
15 ofthe photos appeared to have any characteristics similar to the van I saw. There was one
16 photo I saw that had a ladder and rear mounted tire that looks similar to the van I saw and
11 it is attached as Exh. C. Prior to September 2023, no one who interviewed me ever asked
18 me to try to identify the type of van I saw on December 24, 2002.
19 8. Attached as Exh. D is a color chart where I have initialed a color that closely resembles
20 the color of the van I saw on December 24, 2002, to the best of my recollection.
21 9. As I was pumping gas, I saw a man walk out of the store toward the tan van and I heard a
22 man's voice coming from the van call out, "Got the cigs?" and then the man who was
23 walking out of the store mumbled something back to him. I did not see which direction
24 the man who was walking out of the store went. The man I saw was in his late 40's or
25 early 50's, roughly 5'8" - 5' 10", and approximately 150 - 155 lbs. He was wearing a
26 white t-shirt and was very unkempt. He had facial hair that appeared to be roughly 3 to 5
21 days worth of growth. I recall that the van drove around the store as it exited the gas
28 station. I did not see which way the van went when it left.
DECLARATION OF HOMER MALDONADO

2
l I0. After the van left, I finished pumping gas and got into our vehicle to wait for my wife.
2 When Sue got back into our car, we exited the gas station.
3 11. I turned left onto Miller Avenue, heading west. As I was approaching Covena Avenue, I
4 looked to my right and saw a beautiful, young pregnant woman with shoulder-length dark
5 hair walking her dog, walking south on Covena toward Miller. The woman was standing
6 approximately at the second house north of the intersection, on the west side of Covena.
1 A map indicating the location where I saw the woman with the dog is attached as Exh. E.
8 12. I remember that the young woman caught my attention because she was very pretty, very
9 pregnant, and appeared to be struggling with her dog. The dog, which was a golden
10 retriever-type, bad long a blonde and reddish coat with white coloring around its neck and
11 chest area. I recall pointing out the woman to my wife as we drove by, commenting on
12 how the woman was struggling with her dog. My wife said that she hoped the woman did
13 not fall. The dog was standing on his hind legs with his front paws up in the air pointing
14 away in the direction of a house on the other side of the street. About a week or so later,
15 J drove around the block in that area to see what may have prompted the dog to be barking
16 and pulling in that direction and I observed that there was a house on the east side of
li Covena that had three or four dogs inside a gate that would bark as people were walking
18 by.
19 13. I recall that I was driving pretty slowly down Miller Ave after leaving the gas station and
20 that, as I continued driving past Covena on Miller, I looked in my rearview mirror to see
21 if the woman was still walking her dog. I had an extra wide rearview mirror in the station
22 f,lff\ wago4'd recall looking back to see if the woman had made it to the intersection. I saw
23 the dog first and then saw the woman behind the dog. Looking in my rearview mirror, I
24 saw her turn right onto Miller, heading west, but I did not see her cross the street. >
25 14. The attorneys from the Los Angeles Innocence Project asked me if I could recall any
26 details about the dog I saw. I showed them a 2001-2002 calendar that J asked my wife to
2i save because it has golden retrievers on the cover that reminded me of the type of dog I
28 had seen. A photo of the calendar is attached as Exh. F. The attorneys showed me a
D.ECLARATION OF HOMER MALDONADO

3
1 photograph of a dog that looks similar to the dogs on the calendar cover and asked if it
2 resembled the dog that I saw on December 24, 2002. The dog in the photo looks just like
3 the dog I saw on December 24, 2002. A copy ofthe photograph of the dog that was shown
4 to me is attached as Exh. G.
5 15. I recall that the pregnru:it woman I saw walking her dog was wearing a white long-sleeve
6 blouse and black pants. Sbe had brown hair that went down to about her collar. I recall
7 seeing photographs of Laci Peterson on the news and around the neighborhood after she
8 went missing. I recall immediately recognizing Laci Peterson as the pregnant woman that
9 I had seen walking her dog near Miller and Covena on December 24, 2002. I am positive
10 the woman I saw walking her dog on December 24, 2002 was Laci Peterson.
11 16. After leaving the USA Mini-Mart gas station, my wife and I went to drop offa Christmas
12 gift at a friend's house on Grape Avenue and then we went to do some shopping at Save
13 Mart and Longs Drug Store. I would estimate that the time I saw Laci Peterson was around
14 10 a.m. on December 24, 2002, or perhaps a few minutes earlier or a few minutes later.
15 January 1, 2003
16 17. When I read in the newspaper that the police were seeking information from anyone who
17 may have seen Laci Peterson alive on December 24, 2002, I called the Modesto Police
18 Department (MPD) tip line and reported what I had seen. The attorneys from the Los
19 Angeles Innocence Project showed me a report bearing my name indicating that I called
20 the MPD tip line on January I, 2003. I recognize my name and information in the report.
21 A copy is attached as Exh. H.
22 January 3, 2003
23 18. After I called the tiplinc on January 1, 2003, no one from MPD called me back. I was
24 concerned that the infonnation I gave was not properly relayed to the investigators who
25 were supposed to be looking for Laci. On January 3, 2002, I decided to go to the MPD
26 Search Command Center located in East La Loma Park to make a report in person.
27 19. I spoke to the officer who said he was in charge of running the search team. His name
28 was Sgt. Ron Cloward. The Los Angeles Innocence Project attorneys asked me ifl would
DECLARATION 01' HOMER MALDONADO

4
1 recognize Sgt. Cloward if I saw him in a photo and I told them I probably would. I was
2 shown a photograph of a man and I told the attorneys recognized him to be Sgt. Cloward,
J whom I met with at the MPD Search Command Center on January 3, 2003. This
4 photograph is attached as Exh. I. I aJso recaJI seeing another MPD officer there who I
s only heard referred to as "Officer Jim."
6 20. I told Sgt. Cloward about the woman I recognized to be Laci Peterson walking her dog
7 on the morning of on December 24, 2002. I also told Sgt. Cloward about the van I saw al
8 the gas station that same morning. Sgt. Cloward did not write down anything I said.
9 21. When I explained to Sgt. Cloward that I had seen Laci walking her dog on December 24,
10 he told me and my wife that scent dogs had tracked Laci's scent going in another direction
11 and that the dogs could tell that Laci was taken in a vehicle, not on foot, and that the dogs
12 were "really smart." I understood Sgt. Cloward's statement to mean that based on
13 infonnation he had, what I saw was incorrect and could not have been Laci. He was very
H dismissive of my report and did not ask any questions.
15 22. My wife and I stayed at the MPD Search Command Center after talking to Sgt. Cloward
16 and volunteered in the search efforts for Laci Peterson. Attorneys from the Los Angeles
17 Innocence Project showed me a report dated January 3, 2003, which bas my name and
18 address on it and indicates that my wife and I participated in the search. This report
19 accurately reflects my name and address as well as the areas I recall searching on that
20 date. A copy is attached as Exh. J.
21 23. In addition to calling the tip line and speaking with Sgt. Cloward at the MPD Search
22 Command Center, 1 also spoke to an MPD Police Chaplain at the Red Lion Inn Hotel
23 where volunteers were gathering to help search for Laci Peterson. I told the police
24 chaplain that I had seen Laci Peterson on December 24, 2002. Attorneys from the Los
25 Angeles Innocence Project showed me a police report dated January 14, 2003, in which
26 MPD Chaplain Crocker reported that someone had repeatedly reported that they had seen
27 Laci on December 24, 2002 around 10 a.m. I believe Chaplain Crocker is who I spoke to
28
DECLARATION or HOMER MALDONADO

5
at the Red Lion lnn and that this tip is describing my efforts to report what I bad seen. A
2 copy of the report is attached as Exh. K.
3 Janu,ary 10, 2003
4 24. On January 10, 2003, I was contacted by Gary Ennoian, a private investigator who was
looking into Laci Peterson's disappearance. Mr. Ermoian explained that be was
6 contacting witnesses who bad seen Laci Peterson oo December 24, 2002. l told Mr.
1 Ermoian about what l bad seen that day, including seeing the pregnant woman with her
8 dog and the old, tan van that l saw at the gas station. I provided Mr. Ennoiao with my
g original receipts from Save Mart and Longs showing the times we checked out at those
10 two stores on the morning of December 24, 2002. Los Angeles Innocence Project
11 attorneys showed me a copy of the report authored by Mr. Ermoian and a photocopy of
12 the receipts that I provided him. I reviewed the documents and the contents of Mr.
13 Ennoian's report accurately reflect what I saw on December 24, 2002, and the photocopies
14 arc of the receipts that I provided him. Both are attached as Exh. L.
25. Sometime after I spoke with Mr. Ermoian, I saw a Modesto Bee article that published the
16 photographs of two men who were arrested for committing a bmgla,y of a house on
11 Covena Avenue io the La Loma neighborhood. Upon seeing the photographs, I
18 immediately recogniud one of the men in the photographs as the man that J saw
19 approaching the tan van at the gas station on December 24, 2002. A copy of the photos
20 from the Modesto Bee article is attached as Exh. M.
21 M,ay2003
22 26. After seeing the photographs of the burglars, I contacted Mr. Ermoian. He came to my
23 house on May 16, 2003, and interviewed me again about the man and the van lb.at J saw
24 11 the USA Mini-Mart gas station immediately before I saw Laci Peterson waJkina.
2! 27. I also explAined to Mr. Ennoian that I wa., concerned that the police did not believe the
21i information that I relayed lo them. I had spoken with Vivian Mitchell, another resident
27 of the La Loma neighborhood who recalled seeing Laci Petmon out walking her dog on
21 Christmas Eve. M1. Mitchell told me that after reportina to the police that she had 1tCD
0£Cl.AAATION OP HOMER MALDONADO

6
l Laci Peterson, she felt like she was "going crazy" because the police officers she spoke to
2 were trying so hard to gel her to change her story and say that the woman she saw had
3 blonde hair, instead of brown hair, like Laci.
4 28. Attorneys from the Los Angeles lMocence Project showed me a report authored by Mr.
5 Ermoian recounting the interview he conducted with me on May 16, 2003. This report
6 accurately reflects what I told Mr. Ennoian on that date. A copy is attached as Exh. N.
.., 29. On May 22, 2003, Mr. Ermoian and an attorney named Matl Dalton returned to my home
8 to film an interview with me and my wife. I told them about what I had seen on December
9 24, 2002. In addition to the eve.nts J witnessed on December 24, I recounted to them all
10 of my attempts to report this information to the Modesto Police Department. The
11 attorneys from Los Angeles IMocence Project showed me a copy of this video and asked
12 me if it appeared to be a true and correct version of the interview that was conducted. I
13 recognize myself and my wife as the subjects of the video recorded interview conducted
u by Mr. Gary Errnoian and confirmed to the attorneys that it was an accurate account of
15 that interview.
16 March2004
n 30. Sometime in March 2004, someone from the Stanislaus County District Attorney's Office
18 showed up at my home and served subpoenas on me and my wife. We were confused
19 because we did not understand why the District Attorney's office would subpoena us
20 gjven that no one from the Modesto Police Department had ever interviewed us, despite
21 my efforts to report what I had seen. Copies of both subpoenas are attached as Exh. 0.
22 31. Attorneys with the Los Angeles Innocence Project asked me whether anyone from the
23 Modesto Police Department or Stanislaus County District Attorney's office contacted us
24 prior to July 2004. I explained to them that other than the subpoenas we received in March
25 2004, no one from the police or prosecution ever contacted me or my wife.
26 July 2004
27 32. The attorneys showed me a report by a District Attorney Investigator Bill Grogan stating
28 that he interviewed me and my wife on July 28, 2004. I recall one day in July 2004, I was

7
l walking out of our house and I bad just locked the door when a man approached me. I do
2 not recall bis name. He did not show me a badge or tell me that he was part of law
3 enforcement. He said he wanted to talk to me about the report I submitted about seeing
Laci. We talked for about four minutes. He did not write down anything I said. I don' t
s recall seeing a recording device and be did not ask me if he could record our conversation.
6 I recall he had gray hair and was driving a silver Nissan. He was wearing khaki pants and
., a tan zip up jacket.
8 33. Attorneys from the Los Angeles Innocence Project showed me a report dated July 29,
9 2004 and authored by Stanislaus County District Attorney Investigator Bill Grogan stating
10 that he interviewed me and my wife at our home. A copy ofthis report is attached as Exh.
ll P. I do not recall the interview with Mr. Grogan but the contents of his report are generally
l2 consistent with the other reports I have given in this case from the beginning about seeing
13 Laci walking her dog on December 24, 2002. There is one error in Mr. Grogan's report,
u however, because it states that I did not see Laci or the dog when I looked in the rearview
15 mirror. That is incorrect because I saw both of them very briefly.
16 34. At some point, probably from watching the news about Scott Peterson's trial, I saw a
l? report about the prosecution arguing there were other women walking their dogs on
18 December 24 and that witnesses were confusing Laci for those other women. I told the
19 attorneys from the Los Angeles Innocence Project that I wished I could see photos of those
20 other women so I could sec ifl was confused about seeing Laci, so they showed me photos
21 of several women who may have walked their dogs that day. After looking at those
22 photos, I can confirm that J did not confuse any of those women with Laci Peterson. The
23 photos I reviewed are attached as Exh.Q The woman I saw walking her dog on December
2( 24, 2002 was Laci Peterson. u' ~
th
25 35. I was never called as a witness by either the defense or the prosecution at Mr. Peterson's
26 trial, although I was subpoenaed by the prosecution. I have never testified about what I
2? saw on December 24, 2002. I was available to testify at Scott Peterson's trial in 2004. I
28 would have testified had I been called and would have done so truthfully and consistent

8
J
1 with the facts stated in this declaration. It has always troubled me that Mr. Peterson was
2 convicted without the jury hearing this information, as well as information from other
3 witnesses like Vivian Mitchel] who also reported seeing Laci walking her dog on
4 December 24, 2002.
s 36. I have always believed then and continue to believe now that the woman I saw walking
6 was Laci Peterson. I have told anyone who would listen about what I saw that day because
1 I believe that I saw Laci Peterson alive and walking on December 24, 2002.
8
9 I have reviewed this declaration in its entirety and it is accurate to the best of my knowledge. I
1o declare under penalty of perjury pursuant to the laws of the State of California, that the foregoing
11 is true and correct.
12
13 ~~
14 Date Homer Maldonado
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

9
mXI_w_._. >
EXHIBIT A
EXHIBIT B
‘r”
-,..-.-‘
.
USA Gas Mini-Mart

..._.._..
Camellia' Way
I
E
._
S
.
I
é é
J ”Mannhm
Ii mm
-I
OlhetVek-Ie
Ii g
i)
"-L
HomtMaldonada
1--· I 1-- I
Other Vahlclc m“ mm
=-.:.:.
Haldunad
“mmm I
Milier Ave
'
EXHIBIT C
EXHIBIT D
a, 5
O
0
I I
o 1 ( 11 ~r
0O .5mi
I ”m:
RH.
I
o
0 I._____
Fr?
-"‘<.--
’""
'":-' «.3
0O
-
O 1
0 _ ____,
PM
EXHIBIT E
11drtonA.,. Hlddoc,A.,.
z
11.odonA.. HedODftA.. t
e I
f
I
>
a
>
e
•
•..
•
8
r 9
l M aldonado's
' ~
~ Station Wagon
a
.......
•>
1 ~(.
t
~.
,c
.,..,
"
0 MIINAve M-A•
il
~;; u!
.,
I !
z f USA Mini-Mart
?'
•
,:
EXHIBIT F
Z-YlEiJ{ PLJ.~ fl f.EJ:
2001/1 0()~ ,._ __
•
EXHIBIT G
EXHIBIT H
Calls for 1/1/03/02 1200 - 0000 hrs . - K. Blom 02-142591
Their case number is 03-01-01-055. He is faxing their report.
1455 hrs Assyrian Channel 23 - getting ready to do a show and wanted to Lalk
about the 459R. I referred it to Doug Ridenour who was in the office.
1548 hrs Jack Mangal 544-8710. Retired Figi Islands police omcer. On 12/24,
at 1300 hrs, be saw a pregnant lady with her dog in La Loma park. I le
drove bx later aficr doing some errands and saws her coming out of the
park. He also saw a very old (79) car, light blue, possibly Cutless nearby.
ll was very rusted in the back.
1640 hrs Holmer MALDONADO, 544-1030, 207 Phoenix Avenue. On 12/24,

0945-1000 hrs, he and his wife got gas on Miller Avenue. He said there
was a tan van at the gas station. The van had one occupant in it. The van
was tan with yellow somewhere around it. He said he noticed a pregnant
woman walking her dog near the comer of Miller and LaLoma. He said it
appeared the dog was pulling her. His wife commented that she hoped the
woman didn't faU down. The dog had long hair and was blond in color.
Del Stough notified.
1647 hrs Josh - San Jose Mercury News (408) 288-8060 wants a press release on
the Peterson case.
1656 hrs Caller said her husband is a fishennan and this story does not make sense.
1810 hrs Linda LEWIS, 312-1677, 1812 Clayton Avenue, #5. Her neighbor,a
little mute boy, told her he knew where Laci was. He said she was across
from the Circus and there is a burnt house nearby.
1813 Sharon DAVIS 529-8799 (h), 996-8329(c ), 4105 Copper Cove Ct.
Modesto. On 1/1/03,at 1800hrs,shesawamanonYosemitetakedowna
large Laci Peterson Missing Persons Poster. She followed the vehicle to
the San Francisco turnoft: The license plate is 5507431.
She and her husband, Ronald Davis, were driving on Yosemite near "D"
Street when they saw S1 _ MA, late 20s, early 30s, dark complected, not
Hispanic, average height, stocky, something on his head, full head of hair
from the back, unk color, unk pant, bundled in a jacket. His vehicle was a
medium sized white Mazda pick up with scratch marks on the back of it.
SI got out ofthe driver's side of the truck and took down a large poster off
of a telephone poll near Loveladys. The driver put the sign in the back of
his pick up and drove olT.
Sharon said they followed the vehicle onto 99 northbound. When they got
near Manteca the vehicle occupants saw that the Davis' were following
them. The vehicle changed lanes and took the San Francisco exit. Sharon
m
14865
EXHIBIT Il
-
__v'___.m 1.. m_m_.._mm...... ...... \ .

J
EXHIBIT J
02-142591 DAJLY Page 1 of 4
LOG 1/3/2003
PERSONNEL
TPU Officers............................ 12
St.at Officers . . . . . . .. ...........0
Stanislaus Co. Dive team .............. 0
Chaplains. . . . . . ....... I
Parole.................................. 0
Citizen Volunteers ................... .
ASSIGNMENTS:
TPU Completing follow-up on 290 P.C and high control
parolees
Chaplain Assist at command post.
Citizen Volunteers Assisting with search of residential area and rural

areas of Modesto Search has now moved into the
Ceres and west Modesto areas
TIME: ASSIGNMENT:
09:30 hrs C/P up and running
10:00 hrs Sgt Cloward sent out 16 Citii.eo volunteers to search and will return to
command post when searching areas of maps given
1100 hrs Equestrian Teams ID & H5 started at 1100 hrs searching the 100 Block of
Morton and Tuolumne River area under bridge.
4.05 PM Jim Healy at waste management on Fink Rd called to report they found a
partial rib cage and body parts lodged in their machinery. Sheriff's office
case #S03-220, Lt. Jim Silva advised they arc I 00% sure it was animal
carcass.
5:00PM Marlene Valdt2 signed on
5:00 PM Sgt. Cloward and Sgt Helton going over tomorrow's searching areas
5.00PM Gooules/KeJley back from 290 registrant/parolee contacts 6 follow-ups

from yesterday and attempted 3 contacts have 5 more to contact. Supps to
follow.
Command Post
I
02-14259) DAILY Page 2 of 4

LOG 1/3/2003
5:00 PM lntorf/Fruedenthal back from 290 registrants/parolee contacts, had 3

contacts, I contact to call when he gets back home, 5 registrants have
moved Supps to follow
5.00 PM E.Beffa/Pimentel back from 290 registrants/parolee contacts, had 3

contacts_ I moved, 3 not home and I dead
12:49 PM Intorf/FrudenthnJ headed to Orange Blossom Rd to check out some

suspicious circumstances of a tip called in. Going to meet with Defense
Attorney Forkner at this location.
Parolee Contacts
Contacts No Contacts ~ ill!ll
3 S moved 0 lntorf/Frudentbal
3 l moved E.Beffn/Pimcntel
(3 not home)
0 Follow-ups Gonzales/Kelley
2 Hicks/Locke
4 2 Jail/I Prison Fainter/Ramirez
0 Follow-ups Meyer/Grognn
Command Post Contacts
5:00 PM Lillie Mcbeski 2229 McClure Rd 522-5222

Psychic Line S71-2900
Lillie says she has the ability to see things that have occurred. The name Eric
keeps coming to her relevant to Laci Peterson.
She also says we are searching in the wrong areas. She (sees) a big tree that
has fallen down into the water. She also sees a WFA 150 lbs med ht. Very
tong ponytail, with someone else. She just bought a used purse in the purse
was a religious medallion with a woman and baby on the medallion, she
believes this is a sign. Afier, also seeing a video of husband she can tell he is
hiding something
5:00 PM Tom Harshman I 025 Copper Falls 544-8359
Command Post
02-142591 DAILY Page 3 of 4
LOG 1/3/2003
He said 6 days ago he observed a white/tan van a WFA being pushed through
a door by WMA this occurred about 1000 fi west of Claus Rd Southside of
Scenic along the fenced area. He said the van had 3 windows on the driver's
side. The woman had black hair, red top, black pants. Man pushing her in the
van seemed to look like a street person and there wns also an additional person
in the van. He wants to be contacted by Detectives and wants us 10 put a BOL
out on the van
5:00 PM Ernest Jimenez 1837 Vivian Rd 544-1870

Requested to assist in searching and was given the area of Park Dale, west of
Carpenter Rd both sides of the River
S 00 PM Bomer Maldonado 207 Phoenix 544-1030

He originally searched area of Kansas to Carpenter Rd and Hwy 132 area. He
and his wife said they wouJd go check the Corral Hallow area off of 580 since
this is the wife's route to work.
5:00 PM Gary Hubbard 3220 Tehama Ct 55 1-299S

Volunteer Citizen returned from searching the Whitmore to Service Rd and
Mitchell to Faith Home areas.
5:00 PM Sherman, Linda 1313 Wallin 537-9818 cell# 988-8613

Returned from doing a 3 -day search in the Faith Home/Whitmore areas She
found some disturbed ground behind the Sam Vaughn School in Ceres
She would love to donate part of her inheritance to put towards another
bloodhound or towards the burglary tip to discredit the burglary if had nothing
to do with her disappearance.
5:00 PM Cooper, Suzanne 1109 Nantucket Pl. 578-3789

Bai:ter, Amy 6 Camino Silla, San Clemente 92673 (949) 366-1667
Citizen Volunteers requested to assist in searching. Sgt Johnson gave a map
to have them search in Blue Gum to Shoemake areas
5:00 PM Angie from CA Occupational Physicians wk# 572-2114, home #521-

6830 sent Lillie Meheski down to the Command Post with additional
infonnation. Angie told Lillie she had seen a pregnant woman with dark hair
in a ponytail speed jogging with her dog. A WMA with red hair and
camouflage clothing and hat was with her. Is willing to speak with
Detectives.
5:00 PM Howard Rogers 1508 San Miguel 595-5817 offered his airplane for
search Mr. Rogers will contact the S/O Air Squadron.
5:00 PM Patty and Amber Sanlini 2160 Mission St. 838-3062 Escalon
Given Kansas to Maze and 99 to Carpenter Rd areas.
Command Post
02-142591 DAILY Page 4 of 4
LOG 1/3/2003
5:00 PM Bua,Shane 838-2264 1442 Genevieve Dr. Escalon
Bua-Stewart, Stephanie 126 Steffan, Sonora 536-1128
Citizen Volunteers returned from searching Central Ave to
Mitchell Rd and Whitmore to Hatch areas of Ceres. Nothing unusual
seen.
5:00 PM Amy Baxter called into the Command Post to report suspicious
circumstances on 2nd and E Streets on the West Campus ofMJC. Sgt
Johnson called this in to dispatch to have officers go out and check.
5 00 PM Marlise and Craig Barbare 1679 5th St., Los Osos 93402 (805) 528-4753
Citizen Volunteers called in from searching areas of Tully Rd/Kansas
Ave/Morris/Woodland and Carpenter Rd around RR tracks back to North
St. reporting nothing unusual.
5:00 PM Shutting down Command Post
Command Post O'1 1fl I1·;

EXHIBIT K
Paga 2 of I 15167 a.v. Calla 1/14/03
conducted down south b:{ the volunteers is also going

to include police personnel.
0933 hrs. Trobiano - 201 -493-027 0 - How long of a fishing trip

did Scott take. Where did Scott stop for gas? Did
his wife make him lunch? What was in the sandwich?
What we have to do is catch him in a lie. Maybe Laci
let the dog out because he had to release himself.
Caller says, Scott let the dog out . He scrubbed the
floor so he would have an excuse.
1009 hrs . Chaplai n Crocker - Possibly saw Laci about 10:00 a.m.
Christmas Eve. Don' t remember his name and has called
in twice to the hotline . caller also explained he bad
sent note to us and came in person and spoke to
Station Supervisor and advised him that he was sure be
had seen Laci on Christmas Eve about 10:00 a.m. Has
not had call back frcm us and believes we need to
follow up on this lead and at the very least contact
him. Doesn't have the caller's name only that he
lives in Laci' s neighborhood. Advised would note this
on my log and forward to Det .
1013 hrs . Call 714 or 94 9- 933-1661 cell, this is the number that
Laci is at. Wants to remain anonymous. Saw Laci in
Laguna Hills. Says he saw Laci a week ago at friend' a
house. Laci was there voluntaril y . She was with a
person by the name of Chuck. Tommy calling back . .
Went to a party at that house where Laci is staying
at . Chuck is white, 6', 175 lbs . , blonde, blue, 33
years old. Chuck has been living at address for about
4 years. He was informant for FBI in L. A. County.
This is an apartment complex, lives in Apt. H, Alicia
Parkway exit, lives in complex named Club House.
Short, brown eyes. When spoke to her on the phone
next day after party and he confronted her and asked
her if she was same person on the TV that was reported
missing, she said she didn I t want to talk about it .
1116 hrs. Has anybody looked at couples in the area that can't
have a baby and might be looking for one .
1126 hrs. Det. Constabl e Sandy Courtney - Ontario Provincial

Police - Kincardine 519-396-3341 - Canada -
information regarding Laci Peterson. This afternoon
received a call from a woman named Lucy Duccinais,
resides in London Ontario, 824 Kipps Lane, phone 519-
EXHIBIT L
GARY l. ERMOIAN, INVESTIGATIONS,_ _ _ _ _ _P:.:.::.O.:..::
. BO=X:.::6052=
Collomlo Slate Ucerne • Pl 8855 Modesto. CA 95352
(.!)9)521-9327
1-«»-575-S'V
Fox: (aJ9) 572-3059
www.ermo1on.com
INVESTIGATTVE REPORT
RE: PETERSON
1-10-2003 Contact was made with Homer and Helen Maldonado at their residence
(207 Phoenix Ave. Modesto, CA 95354 (209) 544-1030).
Mr. Maldonado stated that he saw Laci Peterson at approximately 9:50 A.M. to
10:00 A.M. on December 24, 2002.
Mr. Maldonado explained that he and his wife drove to the USA Mini-Mart Gas
Station on Miller Avenue, near the comer of Covena and Miller. Mr. Maldonado
said that after they left the gas station, the drove West on Miller past Covena
Avenue. Mr. Maldonado said that he observed a beautiful young woman who he
described as being "very pregnant" with a golden retriever dog. Mr. Maldonado
said that it appeared that she was having trouble with the dog, as the dog's front
legs were up like he was jumping up on her. Mr. Maldonado said that he
commented to his wife, asking her if she saw the pregnant woman having trouble
with her dog. Mr. Maldonado said that his wife said to him, "I hope she doesn't
fall".
Mr. Maldonado said that he recalls that the woman was dressed in dark pants and a
light top. He said that she had dark hair. Mr. Maldonado said that she was located
about the second house from the comer from Miller Ave., and she was on the
West side of the street. Mr. Maldonado said that he has seen photographs of Laci
Peterson and is sure that the person he saw with the dog was Laci Peterson.
Mr. Maldonado stated that as he continued to drive, he recalled looking in the rear
view mirror to see if she crossed over Miller Ave., however he did not see her.
Mr. Maldonado said that he and his wife then drove to his co-worker's home on
Grope and dropped off a Christmas gift. Mr. Maldonado said that they then went
to Save Mart, and then Longs. Mr. Maldonado supplied to receipts, one from Save
Mart which indicated a date of 12/24/02 and time of 11 :33 A.M. and one from
Longs which indicated a date of 12/24/02 and time of 12:06 P.M. Mr. Maldonado
said that they were Save Mart for quite a while because the store was very busy.
TF-MG119692
SLP0254n
Mr. Maldonado said that he telephoned the Modesto Police on January I, 2003 to
report this infonnation. Mr. Maldonado said that he did not receive a caJJ back, so
he went to the command post to report the matter. Mr. Maldonado said that he was
told a detective would talk to him, however no one has ever followed up. Mr.
Maldonado said that he also told this same story to the Police Chaplain.
Mr. Maldonado said that be did not recall seeing any other people or vehicle near
Laci when he saw her. Mr. Maldoondo did say that when he was getting gas at the
USA Stabon, he observed an older tan colored van, with some yellow, parked at
the station. also getting gas. Mr. Maldonado continued to say that the driver was a
"grubby" looking white maJe, late 40's early 50's, 5' 8", 150 to 155 lbs.
Mr. Maldonado said that he would assist if needed further.
TF-MG119693
SLl'025478
LCll:iS OF.GS
S AVE MART uPERMARKETS
SCE•, IC P -~CE - ~ooes ro
801 Cil~OHE lD.
lCCi> ;9 1210 ~~3 002 ~0Dl5TO. ~~ 9~l~5
~•11s1er • 10 lr• r. 9~
Cur,i. r •:124 12 ; t
IITC A/~ i:~t!li IT ao1" ~ 39
i-;c o ~ q~O! O 50011 I i 6 ~a A.!~l~f!rlCi YOU ~lit<
\ju: • o " '.l~il
~ :1-0:i t I l!Oll
q'
- I •
'l
5 cg
: •n ,al:
11411QA
- 'rf (HEf.'5c
f:; ES ill nDll, EY •I 1 Qlj SPLE • :H '• • •
, ,nt:~E~~~E
P~lllA l!C, HQCS£ IT 19 91? J ~Olli11 L 5L'ii
11 ~:r,A
o:snui.i:
:,( nOC!Sc
so Oi
Ii
I)
1 S 1?9
)0-
I ti:111.~~ iiD Lj ' )
~.99 T
?.o9 I
,..., ;
I Jlllf•L; ~~LL:i
OliCOUlli so " l 10 o,;- 1 PUltf, :11 rlt • . ;9 r
SU&lOT"L ◄" 93 I;~~~ i,F ltiZ l b J.99, ;
1 !-~
lQTl,L
' ;11~
◄8
? !I
,~ • • u 1IT ~E r:r1L~l~ ••
•
Toi&'
.'
! ..o-1ou l S
S
'ilL:7
:.l,
87 .34
.;o .oi>
on:r •I 2• :~RIIGc !)I) Ccr• •t,~at, ~i2010
·••lL ~. c~o:1 • ~7. ;~
C£blT Ctr:i • •••• ···-····:1c
~E:r II ()1008d
LONGS DRUGS STORE ~P•QOVAL: O!lJ2o iuro
OAT£: 12n.: J: r:•,~: H:H:10
IOI o~~o~.E ~DAO
l'~oes·o c~ ,s?s;- ◄ 576
~7X~XIXXX~X' •3 l2 12 , 2003 ?AD ~••" Ch1n91 t ,.00
F-TnEut F~Cn ~~I~-~,
12/ 21/ 2002 12 · 06
10li'L ~us, / : , 9
iEO: 5·~ UfH
4 • f.'l.ctr~"1L C.> on : : . 1n:31 A : 1 9S •
DE FESP 00 TO I AL ,. ~VlNGS
1
• $3.78
00 APPROVED
AMOUNT: I ◄I 2◄
OS•l 002 0C00 l006 8270
r ro-, ours,,, ll!n i1111 1,
To 01.lr ful I, .>I 1_0,a l C.st oners
T~Att, YOU ~0~ 5ri0PP[NG AT LO~GS he~t 1 ~• ' •• ~1,c1 r.~•,a!· 5,.~an
L, ~, ~,, l •~v ~1,t h1,p~ L. v, .on•s
DE:E~oER 2◄ . 2002 12 06 PN
EXHIBIT M
News r ,,._.._.o_(M_o.c.111°'1111) Stt. JI• '- lOOJ ,. 1
••-I')
~tlj><J,.._ ftlWll81)4ll'S.COfflllmaa-/li9710715$ Downloadff on Sep J. 20n
. . ..- .... President rallies soldiers

-----·
-~-;a-.:.~
-~
c---::;.::;
)lrllj . . . . . . . . .
~
:; ~:I
-
.............
=-- -
~--lU
- . --· ..
N ews
News
ewsrv'w‘r H
a
mmmmmm-snml.m~hlo
,,._..__._{I(-,~ • Set.~• 100J PeqelO
..........1)
h-lmr}
1taps ,,.,,_ ...,.,..,..,.,. ~,non11
Im- h.mm.Wwnl-l Mn Sol i, NJ)
0Dwnlollded ... s,011ou
Nuclear
ICT
[cl
lcnsL,
~n., alanns
nations
NIC.IO
\ f,111\\ ....
..............
........
''-
\
=-=-
I“ 'I“ MILL LM ucqumll‘klal t. unwrap-Jun “pun Auk-u;-

an
.
3 x
u
iii;-
. TR ull Eh Inllhmmas «In In ndnil lamb-urn]: run
“MN. I
1n n hrr;| :w tum I1. .‘9- In“ l‘mmul amt-l
.
-;
_.
Anahlunlim himm
:"h
u
ll
1.. Ii
h.
1
m O 2023 “mam. ll mm llama. "my

News ‘l V "g.-
‘
News
. ...,,,...,,_,
l\\lplt/,.._ ,-pai,.rs .com/lmage/'97101JJ1
,,_ - - (M_,,,, <:alllonilol So~ fan 4, 2001 • , . 10
Dow.....lkd on Sep 1, JOU
Donald Pearce, left and Steven

Todd were arrested Friday on
burglary charges. Police say the
case has no link to Laci Peter-
son's disappearance.
News
EXHIBIT N
GARY L. ERM O IAN, I NVE STI GATI ON S, _ _ _ _ _--:-:t.1--".
od:-::!,~~.-;:'~7-:x9535
;;';~~;
Cl>lomio S10t• ucensa • Pl l!M5 (209) 521-9327
1-800-575-tSPY
Foll (209) 57NO~
www e1mo10n COfTI
RE: PETERSON
5-16-2003 A follow up interview was conducted with Mr. Homer Maldonado at

his residence (207 Phoenix Ave. Modesto, CA 209-544-1030). Mr. Maldonado
had telephoned my office indicating that he had some additional information
regarding the Peterson case.
Mr. Maldonado stated that recently the Modesto Bee published the photographs of
Steven Todd and Donald Pearce. Mr. Maldonado said that when he looked at the
photograph of Steven Todd, he reco1,rnized him as the person who ,vas associated
with tl1e tan colored van he saw at the USA Gas Station on Miller Avenue, just
prior to his sighting of Laci Peterson on 12/24/2002. . ._•... t
Mr. Maldonado continued to say that Todd was ex.iring from the store"and
someone from the van asked him "Got the ciggs?" Mr. Maldonado said that he did
not know if Todd was driving the van, or if he just got into the van.
Mr. Maldonado said that the van was not getting gasoline. Mr. Maldonado said
that he recalled that the van was tan colored with some yellow. He said that he
recalled that there was a ladder in the back and also a spare tire cover or holder.
Mr. Maldonado said that he remembered that the van had white curtains covering
the windows of the rear portions of the van.
Mr. Maldonado said that he believes that the van drove around the store as it
ex.ired. Mr. Maldonado said that he did not see which way the van went, however.
Mr. Maldonado said that he and his wife exited onto Miller and this is when tl1ey
saw Laci Peterson and her dog.
Mr. Maldonado expressed concern about the police not believing the infonnation
he relayed to them. He also said that he spoke with Vivian Mitchell, who told him
diat the police tried to tell her that she saw a blonde lady and not a woman \.vith
brown hair that matched the description of Laci Peterson. Mr. Maldonado said that
Mrs. Mitchell wouJd not change her story, however.
TF-MG119697
SLP025482
.:.ll§...llr .ztlisulozfflliillltirllr.lail.. !‘..l..i..
O
EXHIBIT 0
Sllftl..•~· Coll'IIT O.tllltl Allomr,
-
__.,.__
IOO 11" S11ttl, RoOIII 200
Llodt,10. CA tSlS4
~9) ! 2WSS0
......
S.vi l,b,eo County Super lo! Court
400 County Centn
Rtdwood Chy, CA 940U-1'H
People v. Scott Lee Peterson

SUBPOENA (Qmml 01 .lwf!nllo). P E R S O N A L S E R V I C E ITNIISUUS CASU: IAH IU.lEO CASE •
RES 1056770 SC 55500
lHE PEOPLE OFTHE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. TO: .klrlsdctlon: MPO
MPO 02142591
HOMER MALDONADO•, ~, ' " I I •

.. -
:. tC°l• I
FPC 187
207 PHOENIX AVE,
MODESTO CA 701116
1. YOU ARE ORDERED TO APPEAR AS A WITNESS In this action at lhe dal8\ time, and place shown In lhe box
below UNLESS you make a special agreement wilh the l)l'r:m named In Item 3.
a. Dale: 05/17/2004 Time: 08:30 Event: JT • FELONY - IN PROGRESS
b. Address: Superior Court 400 County Center, Redwood City, California 94063-1668
TO AVOID UNNECESSARY COURT APPEARANCES, PLEASE CALL 544-5203 aller normal
business hours the night belore your scheduled appearance for a recorded message.
2 ANO YOU ARE ORDERED TO APPEAR ltl PE'tSON

Notes· CONTACT J'-N GAUTHIER AT 209-852- 1271 PRIOR TO YOUR APPEARANCE
' '
3, IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS regarding this court order, contact the lollowlng person before the dale on
which you are to appear: t
a Name: Kevin Ber11lotto or Jan Gauthier :>. Ttlephone nunber: (209) 544-5203
• - - Y••.artiellllodll _ _ ...,o,ldl,IIN cilcnlOICII IM:wl
BEFORE court, please come to the San Mateo County Dlslrk:t Attorney's Office at 08:00 on 05/17/2004.
DISOBEDIENCE OF THIS SUBPOENA MAV BE PUNl:i,iE0 BY A ANE, IMPRISONMEITT, OR BOTH
A WARHANT i.v,v BE L'iSUED FOR YOUFl ARREST IF YOU FAIL TO APPEAR
James C. Brazollon, D1s111c1Allornoy
Dato 03/25/20().I
A9alll . ... 11
e.tan1ll11&11 tc,11nll 1'4•hkl lllamfl

I00 11'" '''"'· Roam 100
Lloutlo,CIHl ll
ltoll~U~MO
....... •• l•I, ' lo-1--•
S111 \la\N Co.Vllly llupulOt Cowt
400 Co11111y t"11fl
~MW0odC"1,CA.lt013 IIII
t C. ~ -------
Peop\c v. Seo\\ lee Peterson
SUBPOENA \Cum""1101JU'ffl\llo) PERS ONA L SERVI Cl SlNftSUUSCW t . IWI IL\UO cut I
RES 1056770 SC 55500
1HEPEOPLEOF lHE STATE OF CAUFORNI"- TO. -Nnsddion IAPO-
AoontYINllnbal MPO 02142S?I
HREN EUNICE MALDONADO

207 PHOENIX AVE, F PC 187
MODESTO CA 3S36711
, . YOU ARE OROEREO 'TO APPEAR AS A WtlNESS \n lhis actlon al \he dale, time, and Jiace shown In the bo.c
below UNLESS you make a special agreemenl v.ilh the pe"IOn named In item 3.
a. Oa\e: 05/17/2004 Time: 08:30 Event JT • FELONY - IN PROGRESS
b. Mdress: Super\or Court 400 County Center, Redwood City, callfomla 94063-1668
'TO A'VOIO UNNECESSARY COURT APPEARANCES, PLEASE CALL 544-5103 after normal
business hours Iha nigh\ belore your schedu td appearance tor a recorded musage.
2. M-tO YOU ARE ORDERED TO APPEAR IN PERSON

i'la\d, CO~TACT .:AN G.,IJTHIER A.T 209.(,52-127 1PRIOR TO YOUR APPEARANCE.
1/1 7~ 'f') - lJ,h_ ,;:- /1.uvu~

{.( ~ ~ . _,_L-:J'✓~
WI. II,;1 .
tv: al......_J,,
J} ..._;(5/i_.,/ f )IC4f J. '("'1 f
3. IF YOU HAVE /UN QUESTIONS regarding lhl' court order, conlacl tht lollowlng parson belora the d1h1 on
which you are to appear:
a. Name: Kevin Bertalotto or Jan Gauthier b. Telephone l'llfflber: (209) 544-5203
l 'II_S._ Y~lllfNlteladlo_leU.,,...Olbell.lllll.,._.dhcoil
BEFORE court, please come to the San Mateo Counly Ols•rlct Allorney's Office al 08:00 on 05/171?004.
OISOSEOIENCE OF THIS SUBPOENA MAY BE PUNISHED SY A FINE, IMPRISONMENT, OR BOTH
A WARRANT MAY SE ISSUED FOR YOUR ARREST IF YOU FAIL TO APPEAR.
Jamos C Brnzollon, Dislricl Allomey
, ••"'• I I I • • ' t
EXHIBIT P
Sl ,JAMES C. BRAZELTON
District Attorney
OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY

OF STANJSLAUS COUNTY
, /y P.O. Box 1346
t 1~;• n,, ii .. ,h ,~, lf• lt
Modesto, California, 95353
SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT #71
Case No.: 02-DA-0343
D.A. File No.: 1056770
Agency Name & No.: Modesto Police Department #02-14295 l
Report of: Bill Grogan, Criminal Investigator
Date ofSupplcmeat: July 29, 2004
Witoess: Maldonado, Homer

WMADOB 01 -08-45
207 Phoenix A,,e
Modesto, Ca.
(209) 544-1030
Witness: Maldonado, Helen

WFA DOB 03-05-48
207 Helen Ave
Modesto, Ca.
(209) 544-1030
Witness: Wolf, Grace

WFA DOD 06-26-40
504 Phoenix Ave
Modesto, Ca.
(209) 522-2128
Witness: Freitas, Tony

WMADOB 11-13-58
1406 Cypress Ave
Modesto, Ca.
(209) 574-9943
Pagel
0~1912
C:iase No: 02-DA-0343
Date of Supplement: July 29, 2004
Defendant: Peterson. Scott Lee
Synopsis:
I interviewed Homer Maldonado, Helen Maldonado, Grace Wolf and Tony Freitas
regarding their sightings ofLaci Peterson.
Narrative:
On July 28, 2004 at 1540 hrs l contacted Homer and Helen Maldonado nt their residence.
Homer told me that on December 24, 2002 he saw Laci Peterson and her dog near the
intersection ofCovcna Ave and Miller Ave. Homer said that be and his wife, Helen, left their
residence at 0930 hrs on December 24, 2002. They stopped briefiy next door at a neighbors
residence and dropped off a Christmas present.
They then drove to a USA Mini-Mart gasoline station at the comer ofCa.Irellia Ave and
Miller Ave. Homer said his wife, Helen, went inside to pay for gasoline and to buy lottery
scratchers. Homer stayed outside to pump gasoline into his vehicle. While pumping gasoline,
Homer noticed an older dull brownish yellow van parked on at the island across from his vehicle.
Homer did not see anyone near the vehicle nor was the vehicle receiving gasoline. Horner
dcscnbcd the vehicle as older with at least windows on the passenger side and rear doors. The
windows were covered wilh white curtains. The van had a chrome ladder on the right rear door,
a spare tire with a metal covering painted the same color as the vehicle mounted on the left rear
door and o. chrome rack on the roof. Homer believes the vehicle could have been a Chevrolet and
had widows on the drivers side also, but he was not positive. Momenls Jater, a white male adult
in his late 40's or early S0's. 5-9 lo 5-10, t 50 to 1551bs wearing a white t-shirt walked fiom the
market to the van. The mnn was ,,ery unkempt with a four to five day growth of facial hair.
Someone from within the van askt:<l lhe mal~ adult if he got the cigs. The male aduJL replied, yes.
Homer could smell an odor ofcigarette smoke coming from the van, hut could not see anyone
inside the van. Homer said Helen walked from the market just as he finished putting the gasoline
into their vehicJe. As Homer and Hek:n were getting into lbe vehicle, Helen made a comment to
Homer about smelling cigarette smoke. Homer started scratching his lottery scratchers that were
purchased by Helen. Homer looked up and the van wa.,; gone. Homer did not see the vehicle
leave the parking lot oor did he see which side of the van the male adult entered.
Homer said he left the gasoline station sometime between 0945 and I 000 hrs. He drove
from the lot and made a left tum onto Miller Ave. Homer drove one block to the intersection of
Miller Ave and Covena Ave. As Homer was driving through the intersection he looked to his
right and noticed a dog and a very pretty woman standing in the street on the west side of Covena
Ave. 1be dog and woman were standing oeartbe driveway of the second house north of~le-r
Ave. They were ju.st east of the blue house number that was painted on the curb. Homcr
Pagel
Cnse No: 02-DA-0343
Report of: Dill Grogan, Criminal lnv~tigator
descrjbed the woman as a young white female wnh brown hair just off the coUar. The woman
was wearing a long sleeved whlte blouse and black pants. Homer could not remember what type
of shoes she was wearing. Homer descnoed the dog as a golden retriever, golden in color. What
drew .Homer's attention to the woman was her smile and she was so beautiful Homer said when
he first looked at the woman she was facing south and the dog wa~ on a lea.c;h directly in front of
her. The dog turned around facing eastbound and stood on its back legs causing the woman to
face eastbound. Homer al that time could tell that the woman was very pregnani. The dog
looked very old and had white hair showing from its neck to stomach area. Homer asked Helen if
she saw the pregnant woman having trouble with her dog. Helen made the comment, "1 hope she
doesn't fall."' Hele.n said she never saw the woman because she was putting her JllOney in her
wallet. Helen said she made the comment about hoping the woman didn't full in response to her
husband's question.
Homer continued driving westbound on Miller Ave. He looked in his rear view mirror but
never observed the dog or woman again. Homer also said be did not see the brownish yellow vao
after it left the gasoline station.
Homer said days later, he saw a picture ofa burglary suspect in the Modesto Bee. The
picture Jooked like the person he saw coming out of the USA Gasoline Mini-Mart and walk
toward the brownish yellow van.
After observing the woman, Homer drove straight to a co-worker's home on Grape Ave
to drop offa Christmas present. Homer then drove lo Save Mart and Longs Drugs to shop.
Homer produced receipts showing be made purchases ul Save Mart at J 1:33 A.M antl Longs
at J2:06 P. M. Both stores are located at 80 l Oakdale .Rd.
Homer said on Sunday, December 22, 2002 around J IO0 hrs he was driving westbound on
La Loma Ave. At the intersection ofI..a Loma Ave and Haddon Ave near a small park he saw the
swne woman and dog walking westbound on Haddon Ave. 1bc woman wns dressed in the same
white blouse and black pants as on December 24, 2002.
Between the morning ofDecember 24, 2002 when Homttr ~w tlie woman and her dog on
Coveoa Ave and January J, 2003 Homer and Helen watched several news broadcasts and articles
written in the Modesto Bee surrounding the disappearance of Laci Peterson. Homer, believing
the woman he observed on Covcna Ave was Laci Peterson, telephoned the Mod~io Police
Department to report his sighting. Homer stated that he was advised a detective would contac1
him at a later time. However, Homer was never contacted.
On Saturday, January 3, 2003 after reading numerous articles in the Modesto Bee and
seeing several television news broadcasts concerning the disappearance of Laci Peterson, Homer
Page3
Case No: 02-DA-0343
and Helen volunteered their assistance in the search for Laci Peterson. Homer and Helen
contacted officers at the command posl and they were given posters with Laci's picture and an
area to search. During the search attempt they spoke to Sgt. Ron Cloward and a Police Chaplin.
Homer told both about his sighting of Laci Peterson on December 24. 2002.
Homer and Helen decided to search an area near Coral Hollow Road and Highway 580.
They fuund a black bag that contained rags that were red stained nnd wrapped in clear plastic.
They notified their findings to the Modesto Police Department. Homer could not remember the
exact date he made the discovery. Homer stated he checked the Coral Hollow area because be
commutes to worked each day on Coral Hollow Road and occasionally sees S\L~icious people
and vehicles. Homer said be once spotted n red Chevrolet Qunaro parked near Coral Hollow Rd
during the time officers were investigating the Yosemite National Par.le homicide case. Homer
said he could smell something dead coming from the area of the vehicle. Homer believes the
vehicle was parked in the area ofroad marker 8.1. Homer telephoned and was interviewed by the
F.BJ.
Horner said after comparing the photo of Laci Peterson in the newspaper, on television
news broadcasts and the posters he was given by the command post, he is sure the woman he saw
on December 22, 2002 and December 24, 2002 was Laci Peterson.
On JuJy 29, 2004 1530 hrs I made contact with Grace Wolfat her residence.
Grace told me that on December 24, 2002 between 0900 hrs and 1000 hrs but closer to
0930 hrs she made a sighting of Laci Peterson. Grace said sbe left her home shortly before 0900
hrs to drive her son, Terrell Price to a location on Morris Ave. After dropping her son o:ffshe
stopped at Save Mart Markel on 17'4' St Grace then drove home eastbound on Eocina Ave.
As Grace was driving eastbound on Encina Ave between Santa Barbara Ave and Santa
Cruz Ave, Grace observed a woman walking her dog. Grace described the woman as white with
dark, above the shoulder length hair, she wearing white tennis shoes, black pants, a white blouse
and a blue nylon jacket. The woman was walking a medium sized copper color dog westbound on
the north side of Encina Ave. Grace said she made eye contact with the woman and they smiled
at each other. Grace did not see anyone else in the area.
Grace said on Sunday, December 22, 2002 she was working in her yard when the same
woman and dog, accompanied with a white male walked by her residence sometime between
1530 and 1600 hrs. The woman was wearing t.he same black pants and blue nylonjacket. The
man was holding the dog's leash. Grace exchanged heJJos with the couple. The couple was
walking south on the west side ofPhoenix Ave. Grace said they were holding hands and see.med
very happy. They both had beautiful smiles.
Page4
Case No: 02-DA-0343
Report of: Bill Grogan, Criminal lnve!ltigator
Gntcc saw the couple again walking past her house southbound on the west side of
Phoenix Ave in Nowmber, before Thanksgiving, 2002. Grace said her granddaughter was with
her in the front yard. Grace's granddaughter told the couple that she liked their dog. The couple
stopped briefly end made a comment back and then continued on their wdlk.
Oracc said shortly after December 24, 2002 she started seeing articles in the Modesto Bee
and teJevision regardiog the disappearance ofLaci Peterson. When she looked at the photos of
Laci and Scott Peterson in tbc newspaper and on television she was convinced that the couple that
walked by her residence in Nol'ember and December 2002 were Scott and Laci Peterson. Grace
also is convinced that the woman she saw walking her dog on December 24, 2002 was Laci
Peterson.
Grae<: said she read news articles and watched television reports regarding the
disappearance of Laci Peterson for days after December 24, 2002, the day she sighted Laci
walking west on Encina Ave. Grc1ce was hesitant on reporting the incident to the police because it
appeared to her that the medill was discrediting anyone that reported seeing Laci Peterson.
Grace did tell her Physicians Assistant, Greg Wilkerson who works for Dr. Rhoades about
her sighting ofLaci Peterson on December 24, 2002. Greg told Grace that she needed to can the
police or the attorney. Grace could not remember what dote she visited Greg Wilkerson.
During a subsequent visit with Greg Wilkerson, Grace was told by Greg that he called the
attorney, regarding her sightiog of Laci Peterson. A private investigator made contact with Grace
Wolf.
On July 29, 2004 l made contact with Tony Frietas at his residence.
Tony told me that he is a truck drivt:r for Orowheal Bread. His route takes him in the
mornings fromPerko's Resturant on Yosemite Blvd to Denny's Resturant at Downey Ave nnd
McHenry Ave. On December 24, 2002 he left Perko's sometime between 0935 and 0945 hrs.
Tony was driving toward town on La Loma Ave. As Tony approached a small triangle ~'Y
park located at La Loma Ave and Santa Barbara Ave he observed a woman walking b.er dog.
Tony said be glanced to his left and saw the woman on the south side ofLa Loma Ave across the
park. The woman wus a white female, 5-4 to 5-5 with dark shinny shoulder length hair. She was
wearing light colored pants and a dark colored jacket or pull--ovcr sweater. Tony could not sec a
blouse or the type ofshoes that the woman was wearing. Tony said the dog was reddish brown in
color and the dog appeared to be pulling the woman.
Tony looked to his right and noticed two dirty looking males in the park. Tony said one .
was a BMA and the other a HMA The BMA was sitting on a bus bench and the HMA wns
Page5
n~l916
·case No: 02-DA~0343
Report or: Bill Grogito, CrimiDBl lnvesti~ator
Date of Supplement: J uly 29, 2004
squatting next to the bench. The bus bench was located on La Loma Ave next to the park. Both
males were dirty and their clothing ragged. The two males did not appear to fit the neighborhood.
On January 4, 2003 Tony was al his residence talking with his friend, Chris Rawley. They
were discussing the posters with~ photograph of Loci Peterson listed as missing. Tony told
Chris that he believed be saw Laci oo December 24, 2002. Chris convinced Tony to call the
police 3.lld report his sighting ofLaci Peterson. Tony called and spoke to a female at the
department. The female told Tony that a detective would cafl at a later date. A detective never
called.
Supervisor:
Page6
0~1917
EXHIBIT Q
02-142591
02 • 142591
23906
JUN 19 2000
'
-
:-’r' (.-
Mm..h-w
..
-..r .-
02-142591
__..
307091
237q3
02-142591
30?3
\....
'-
...
_..-—v-u——. 11...»... "tutu - .
'
_.....
java?
3091L
~..'
I .-C:: ~ -t - J#/
• ,, '\ 02 .. 142591
H ~ '
•
I
I
r
I
... I
I I
\; I
~
0
0
N \
'r· >
\. N
.,...
z
\ ::>
-,
\
........
~ ·~,·· ·::,, ,\ ~ ~-~- ' ~
~ ~~~••: ·~' • .....··~11! ' , , l,• J

I ., •., I
' . .
~.. ~"~-- '__,'.•_.:..r. ....-.... ; ..
...
-
EXHIBIT 11
EXHIBIT
Declaration of Tony
Tony Freitas
-=-=-=-
l Declaration of Tony FreltiJ
2 I, Tony Freitis, hereby declare under penalty of perjury that the following is true and

4 1. I'm a current resident of Modesto, California.
5 2. In September 2023, attorneys from the Los Angeles Innocence Project contacted me and explained
6 that they were investigating Scott Peterson's case. They asked me if I recalled giving statements
., in the past about what I witnessed on December 24, 2002, in connection with the disappearance
8 of Laci Peterson. I agreed to answer their questions to the best ofmy memory.
9 3. In December 2002 I resided at 1406 Cypress Ave in Modesto, California. I was employed by
10 Orowheat Bread, as a Route Driver, delivering bread products to restaurants in Modesto.
11 4. On December 30, 2002, after I heard that a woman named Laci Peterson w~issing and saw her ~
12 picture on the news and on Missing Person flyers, a.u:i,nd 11, ed roy reroe Sf"'.;alled the police to \ .
13 report that I had seen Laci walking her dog on a sidewalk near a triangular park north of Yosemite
14 at about IOa.m. on the morning of December 24, 2002. The attorneys showed me a report showing
15 that the tip was called in that date. The information in that report appears to accurately summarize
16 what I saw, to the best of my recollection. A copy of the report is attached as Exh. A.
17 5. The attorneys asked me ifl would still recognize the type of dog I saw and I told them I probably
18 would. They showe1 ~~v.~oto of a dog and I confirmed that the dog appe~be similar to
J:' v<.' C4t I ~ u : { ~ l--.DS ,Pt fl ,i--12 Ph -/h I e<Sh ,
the dog I saw with Laci. A photo of the dog that the attorneys showed me is attacR as Exh. B.
19
20 6. ln early 2003, I recall meeting with an investigator named Gary Ermoian, who contacted me to
21 ask me for details about what I had seen on December 24, 2002. At the request of the attorneys,
22 I reviewed a memo that indicates it was authored by Mr. Ermoian, and I can confirm that the
23 contents of the report appear to be accurate and correc~A copy off the report is attached as Exh.
24 C.
25 7. The attorneys also asked me to review a video clip of what appeared to be Mr. Ermoian
26 interviewing me in May 2003, to verify that I am the individual in the video. I can confirm that I
27 am the person being interviewed by Gary Eromian in that video clip dated May 21, 2003. A
28 screensbot from the video the attorneys showed me is attached as Exh. D.
DECLARATION OF TONY FREITAS

I
1 8. I do not recall speaking to anyone from the police department until sometime in 2004 when a man
2 named Bill Grogan of the Stanislaus County DA's Office asked me about what I saw. I reviewed
3 the contents of the memo concerning Mr. Grogan's interview with me that the attorneys showed
4 me and 1 can confinn that it is accurate to the best of my recollection. A copy of the memo is
5 attached as Exh. E.
6 9. Attorneys from Los Angeles Innocence Project showed me a map of the La Loma area that I was
7 driving through on December 24, 2002, and pictures of two intersections on La Loma Ave: La
8 Loma/Santa Barbara and La Loma/Miller. The attorneys asked me if I recognized either
9 intersection as the one I recall seeing Laci Peterson at that day. I recognized the photograph of
10 the intersection of La Loma and Santa Barbara as the location I saw Laci Peterson walking her
11 golden retriever sometime around 9:45 and l 0 a.m. on December 24, 2002. I specifically
12 recognize the bench in the photo as the bus stop I saw two men at on the opposite side of the road
13 from where I saw Laci Peterson walking. I have indicated on the photo and map where I recall
14 seeing Laci. A copy of the streetview photo and map are attached as Exh. F.
15 10. Attorneys from the Los Angeles Innocence Project showed me a statement I signed in 2012 that
16 appears to indicate that I saw Laci Peterson at the intersection of La Loma/Miller. I do not recall
17 the investigator who conducted that interview with me showing me any photographs of the
18 intersection. After viewing the streetview photos of both intersections, I can confinn that where
19 I saw Laci Peterson was near the intersection of La Loma and Santa Barbara, which is consistent
20 with alt my previous statements. A copy of the 2012 statement is attached as Exh. G.
21 I have reviewed this declaration in its entirety and it is accurate to the best of my knowledge. I declare
22 under penalty of perjury pursuant to the laws of the State of California. that the foregoing is true and
23 correct.
24
25
26 Date
27
28

2
sh-Ir: :1... v: Eei.¥. ..
EXHIBIT A
«V Emmm
1.4757
Bev. Valdivia Calls - 12-30-02
0805 hrs. Anonymous - Driving yesterday on Yosemite Blvd. when came by Modesto
Reservoir she heard a very strong voice say, "Ifyou kill me you kill my baby."
Heard this all the way until she got into Empire. She is Psychic.
0806 hrs. Anonymous - Suggested we check fertility clinics and adoption agencies.
Possibly taken for the baby.
0827 hrs. Bonnie Miller, 544-8389 - On 12/24/02 between 2:00 and 4:00 p.m., woman
hovering over bridge on Claus Rd. near Scenic on west side of bridge. Looked
like she was leaning over looking down the bridge. Wearing black pants and
white top, heavy set not sure if pregnant, little longer than shoulder, dark haired
not sure ofethnicity. Referred to Cloward for follow up.
0834 hrs. Larry Owen - Modesto Parole -Black man on parole for robbery, John Cotton,
likes to contact white women, parole has recently received letters from 4 women
that want no contact with Cotton. One letter said he told her hewanted her to be
his sex slave. Cotton showed up on 12/23/02 11:00 p .m at one of the women's
houses, which he was advised not to do by parole, she became very scared.
Description, 6'3 ", 220 lbs., last known address 1605 Shirley Ct., Modesto. Lists
phone 342-0488. Referred to Cloward for follow up.
0838 hrs. Becky Wooten · Ex-husband lives in Modesto, registered sex offender, heard his
intro drugs, his address is 2309 Monte Verde, Antony Cothran. Modesto grabber
pied guilty to 30 charges ofsexual assault. Said he did it for thrill of chase by
police, ifhe had not been caught he said he would have actually raped and killed.
Referred to Cloward for follow up.
0853 hrs. Talk to a pet Psychic.
0854 hrs. J anny Becker• 925-513-7877 • Her daughter bas a friend who looks just like
Laci and is 8 ½ months pregnant also. She was at the Longs Drugs in Brentwood
prior to X-mas and that a male told the store manager to tel I the her that someone
was foliowing her and to get out now. She bas been in fear since then.
0856 hrs. Anonymous· Could she have just have taken off!
0858 hrs. Mr. Morton· Oklahoma - Wife had dream, saw lots ofstuff in dream. In dream
they were going down dirt road, not gravel, it was real muddy next to an older
river bead or some, got out of the van and tripped over something that turned out
to be Laci's body. Slipped on her knee and Laci's pants were ripped by the knee,
had flowers or print on. Had mouth open saw her teeth, pretty skin, something in
1481 3
-
1.4758
her _h~ad like a scarf. Right beside the roadway, covered with mud in a sitting
position. No houses in area.
0902 hrs. When she walked through bike path, where the waters flows at, Dry Creek Park,
few spots she took bike through, almost fell down, really muddy, need to check
that area, possibly slipped, hit her head and fell into water.
0908 hrs. Suggested we contact Sonya Fitzpatrick, pet Psychic.
0909 hrs. White van at the comer of Prescott and Bangs, second or third house on the south
side on Bangs east of Prescott. Possibly connected Laci Peterson and the burglary
across the street.
0914 hrs. Lives on Elizabeth Ave. On X-mas Eve was going to work, a little after 8:00
am. saw older brown big car like Cadillac, possibly chocolate brown, someone in
the car and it was out in the roadway not parked, staring at her, 1637 Elizabeth is
her address, gave her an enie feeling. In his 50-60's.
0919 hrs. Suggests we check under her own home in a Christmas tree type bag.
0922 hrs. Kathleen Langford· Saw three dogs digging in what appeared to be a fresh
mound ofdirt. Between Shanks and Bradbwy Rd. in Merced County off
Highway 99, east side of highway by railroad tracks.
0923 hrs. Dixey Hagadorn • 527-4886 - Lives on Scenic Dr. property goes down to River.
Night ofMonday 23"'. Man came to her door, late in evening, claimed to be
evening, claimed to be from Greeley Hill wanted money broke down and needed
to get home. Claimed his name was Tim. Was creepy, dirty, claimed to be a
mechanic. Blom sent e-mail to Sgt. Steele regarding this call.
0958 hrs. Anonymous· Thinks she has information about baby. Male child brought to
Children's Hospital in San Diego on Monday 23"'. Tak.en to Lake Side Fire Dept.
and then transported to Children's Hospital and is currently in foster care.
1010 hrs. Dave Nelson, local disc jockey, 551-1306 - Saw a suspicious vehicle that looked
like Scott's at the comer ofEdgebrook and El Vista, the Mormon Church, same
night ofLaci's disappearance. Call taken by Doug Ridenour and passed on to me.
101 l hrs. Portland Oregon· in 1940 in San Marino, Ca. Possibly fell in a well or
something nobody was aware was there.
1014 hrs. Nancy Andre· 341-6422 • Heading to work at Gallo 8:00 a.m. X-mas Eve..
Comer of La Loma by the bridge, north side of bridge at the comer of the street
that heads up to La Loma, maroon backpack, man rummaging through a
14814
,----
,,
14759
backpack.
1020 hrs. Cathy Nahirny • 703-567-6856,703-851-0530 - She is with the Center for
Missing Children can verify employment at 800-843-5678 or 703-274-3900. She
does profiles. Has a profile of person who may have abducted Laci Peterson.
Newborn infants abducted by women who are trying to solidify relationship with
significant other. Harder to abduct from hospital. Potential for violence in home
setting or other locations like park increases. Potential abductor of Laci is
possibly mid to late teens, poss 20-30's in relationship that is falling apart.
Faking a pregnancy, she feels she can't survive without her significant other so
she claims to be pregnant. Will gain weight, possibly pad herself, allow family to
give baby shower, etc. When due date comes up is caught. She has to produce
child. Will usually go to a hospital to attempt to get a baby. Rovena Ohio case
was similar. Could be a possible casual acquaintance that may have met Laci at
doctor's appt. This person will claim to deliver when significantother is not at
home. Her gut feeling tells her that abductor promised her significant other that
they were going to have baby on X-mas. Crime of opportunity. If regular routine,
could be anybody. Suggests we follow up on, check local hospitals, 25-50 miles
away also. Check for possibility for emergency room coming in and saying had
baby at home and seeking check of newborn baby.
1102 hrs. Worked for Modesto Hospice, man who directed was Dale Peterson, son Scott
was into drugs, meth lab, police came in and arrested him.
1119 hrs. Had a vision. Name to name of Buchanan, kind of old building or barn. At the
end ofFloyd and Fine Rd., possibly have a dog go out there and check area. Saw
a tower and mountains in dream and when drove there before call notice a tower
and the mountains in background.
1130 hrs. Tried to track for last three days since Sat. Different reading today, thought she
was on Laird Rd. and Grayson. Today is getting a different reading. Looking at
location on State Route 33 near Wesley, approximately 1,086 feet north of Frank
Cox Rd. east side of the road. Aerial satellite no building indicated, possibly in a
car due to no buildings. Readings also indicate consistent with her digital
fingerprints that he has. Suggest we look there due to it not being very far from
original location. Will call when and if has additional information for us. This is
in reference to her key code #3-13.2. Referred to Cloward for foUow up.
1132 hrs. Margarita Carillo - Heard scream in am at about 9:00 a.m.on X-mas Eve, lives at
303 La Loma. Just one scream, at first wasn't sure, she was kind of sleepy.
Strange because it was only one scream. Referred to Cloward for follow up.
1137 hrs. Carson City, Nevada· Saw a picture of her husband who doesn't want to be seen
on TV, media, etc. Thinks he doesn't want to be seen because he might have
done something to her and doesn't want anybody to recognize him.
14815
,,-- 1.4760
l 140 hrs. Concerned parent, has'one daughter. Thought the dog and the girl being very
close. If we give dog piece of clothing, perfume, etc. Maybe that would help.
1141 hrs. Gut feeling, baby Nick that was found could be Laci's baby. Baby Nick found in
Los Angeles area. Woman left baby at fire station then turned over to authorities.
1142 hrs. Coming down J32 on X-mas Eve in the morning from Tracy. Notice on the side
of road, maroon van possibly Ford Aerostar, parked on the south side right past
the bridge by Fisherman's Club. Referred to Cloward for follow up.
1145 hrs. Gail Borden, 588--1088 • Sonora, Ca.• Might possibly seen Laci in Sonora at
Pak N Save after 3:00 p.m, woman was not pregnant though. Information from
someone that lives up there, has Jived there all their lives. Woman's niece works
with Laci's bestfriend or where Laci worked.
1147 hrs. Alina Cervantes· 916-4S7-S178· Reading through personal adds, Sacramento
News and Review. Single white male, blond blue eyes is seeking pretty pregnant
woman or lactating with new born. Your please is my pleasure, would love to
hear from you. Article states he is located in the foothills. Contact number given
for this person is Code 33452.
1154 hrs. Butch Keller· Possibly someone took her for the baby.
11S4 hrs. Lives in Ravena, Ohio. Similar case about a year ago. They kept woman hostage
because they wanted the baby. Possibly contact that agency and give idea what to
look for.
1303 hrs. Linda Wallis, Benicia 707-747-5S69 - Has brother named Bill Wallis, father
passed away about 2 months ago, brother is over the edge. 2 months ago he said
he would like to find a woman around 30 yrs old, have a baby boy. About 20
years ago found ex-wife and harassed her for $50, she was a brunette like Laci.
Knows the Modesto rivers and parks, lives I mile off La Loma area. 1808
Woodcrest Dr. is brothers address. Always bullied women and old men. Got an
assault charge on I 1-19-02 and dropped by D.A. On I 1-18-02 held mother, the
lawyer and Linda hostage at attorney's office, we never showed up. Has access to
guns. Found out through his records that on the 3'd of Jan. was adjudicated by
judge as being mentally ill, charge 8103 W&I. He's threatened to kill himself and
on 11-19 police at house threatened to bum house down with him in it. Nothing
going his way with father's will. Lives in New Zealand but has been held up at
father's house since his death. On I I·19 also threatened to kill Linda's fiance.
Supposed to go back to New Zealand on the 29th but he canceled his ticket. Has
been calling victims of crimes and harassing them. Wants them to charge her
fiance rather than himself on the assault case. Father's attorney, Betty Ann Reed
will be in court on Jan 3 rd• To attempt to keep him from getting weapons. Before
father died Oct. 26th called Linda and told her that Bill needed help. He also put a
1481 6
14761
false restraining order on her fiance and they had to go to court on that.
Forwarded to Denis Holmes for follow up per Sgt. Zahr's request.
40 calls
1307 hours Lisa - 612-7511 - Father claims to have seen her on the 261h at the Exxon in
French Camp at 3:00 a.m. Hasn't spoken to dad so doesn't have any description
or further details just what mother told her. Father's name is Jose, will attempt to
get him to call or she will interpret.
1329 hrs. Have we attempted contact Psychic Silvia Brown, 408-379-7070.
1331 hrs. Margarita Carillo. Forgot to mention to officers this morning that the scream
was a distant scream, almost faint.
1332 hrs. Why can't we do Amber Alert for Laci Peterson? We do that for children,
well, Laci was pregnant and doesn't child count for something.
1336 hrs. Sabrina - When she heard of this it bothered her. Her family is friends with
Laci's family. A light colored van, panel type van, also came up with the man
that took Laci away fiom dog was light skinned with possibly a short beard, short
hair but not real short possibly down to collar and license plate is possibly 976H,
possibly the letter after His P. This she got from communicating with the dog.
Seems like it was on the way home fiom the park but not in the park, it was
leaving the park when she was separated from the dog. What made her excited
and she lives in Santa Cruz County. Thinks the dog could lead them to the right
spot ifdog knew what it needed to do. Dog only saw one person. Not sure if
California plate or other state. First found this information from dog on Friday
2'P' at 9:00 a.m. before media put this information out.
1347 hours On X-mas Eve. Lives on Snyder made a couple ofcalls, though there was a
burglary taking place. Possibly black Toyota pickup involved in the burglary. As
he was going home today, at 1705 Sheldon Ave. offCarver, looks like same
vehicle. Three garage door, doors are all blue, looks like a tri-plex. Possible
connection with Laci case due to a co-worker advising him who knows Laci's
family very well said there was a black pickup possibly involved.
1405 hrs. Beal Davis - 619-253-1308 - Check to sec if anybody has brought new baby
home that is not theirs. Interested in reward if this pans out.
1410 hrs. Lucy · Has anybody considered the animal Psychic.
1422 hrs. Flint Michigan - Wants to tell us that Psychics are great potential witnesses.
Suggest the animal Psychic from Animal Planet possibly Sonya Freidman.
14 81 7
.,
14762r'
,,
1S0S hrs. Sandra • Dog trainer, wants to know if anybody has ta.ken dog back on original
path.
55 calls
1513 hrs. Article in paper regarding burglary across the street. Possibly connected, think
about it
1517 hrs. Patricia Calvert- Person may have abducted her for the baby.
1548 hrs. ony Freitu-574-9943-Saw Laci on 12-24-02 about 10:00 a.m. on La Loma.
Two guys across the street from her, one Hispanic and other African American
sitting at the bus stop. Looked like low-life type people. From Yosemite, stop
light and triangular park there. Laci was on the south side ofstreet on sidewalk
walking the dog in a northwest direction going towards town on La Loma . He
stopped at the stop light and the two guys were on the other side of the street
again, one sitting on the bus bench and the other sitting on the grass. Clothes
were really raggedy.
1600 hrs. CookJe from Santa Monica - called and says to call Pet Psychic.
1616 hrs. Doug Kuhl - 510-527-2039 • Called a couple days ago. Lives in Berkeley.
Either X-rnas Eve day or day after on Marina, painted trailer, double axle or
tandem axle trailer sitting in parking lot. Was there between 12:30 and 1:00 on
that day and is pretty sure he could identify it ifit was indeed parked there.
Knows where it was parked and ifhe saw a picture of it be would be able to verify
ifit was there. Large enough to pull a 25-foot boat Was the only one there.
Foiwarded to Denis Holmes for follow up per Sgt. Zahr's request.
1644 hrs. Niece keeps dreaming that Laci is in the lot behind Vintage Faire Mall.
1704 hrs. Kim Major-496-1833 • Two blocks off Yosemite, two vacant houses with lots
of garbage. People have gone into both houses, Kim sometimes leaves and comes
back and the doors are open both evenings and mornings. Have police checked
houses. She is at 130 Angle Lane. Across the street, two houses down, another on
the same side ofstreet as hers with a chain link fence around front yard. Copied
and given to Zahr for possible folfow up.
1711 hrs. Theory, thinks P.D. may be off track. Possibly only 8 months pregnant and
someone whom she may have met at doctor's office or park, etc who couldn't
have children or had miscarriage took her for the baby.
1715 hrs. Anoe Lchikalncn • 527-1195 • Was jogging in Dry Creek Park on X-mas Eve
with a partner. Saw a man, looked like be was upset and angry, like he may have
been on drugs. Was not at park area. Went down the trail at Claus.jogged up to
14818
... .._'.-_..-T._'n;.. _...'_Lm.m
EXHIBIT B
EXHIBITB
-__. ..._._ ...___ . ... .- _,_.__ .“
EXHIBIT C
EXHIBITC
GARY L. ERMOIAN, INVESTIGATIONS._ _ _ _ _ ___,,P.O:.:.:
. BO=X;.::;::5052=
Colftmo State license I Pl Bass Modesto, CA 95352
(209) 521-9327
1~76-ISP'f
Fax: (209) 672-3059
www.ermoiOn.com
RE: PETERSON
1-20-2003 Contact was made with Tony Freitas (1406 Cypress Ave. Modesto, CA
95350 (209) 574-9943).
Mr. Freitas stated that he is a Route Driver for Orowheat Bread, and on his route
he services restaurants. Mr. Freitas stated that on December 24, 2002 he was at
Pcrko's Restaurant on Yosemite Blvd making a delivery. Mr. Freitas said that
when be left Perko's be drove down Yosemite, and turned onto La Loma Avenue.
Mr. Freitas said that this is bis usual route to go to Denny's Restaurant at S points
McHeruy Ave.
Mr. Freitas said that as be drove down La Loma. he recalls seeing whom he now
recognizes from the posters and photographs, as Laci Peterson. Mr. Freitas said
that he recalled specifically that she was walking a golden retriever type dog, that
she was obviously pregnant, and, that she was wearing dark clothing. Mr. Freitas
said that be is not positive on the time, however he believes that it was at least
9:45 A.M Mr. Freitas said that Laci was walking on the South side of the street,
heading West, toward town. Mr. Freitas said that she was across the street from
the triangular shaped grass/park like area, which is close to the Miller Ave.
intersection. Mr. Freitas said that he did recall seeing 2 "scraggily' looking male
subjects at the bus stop bench, located at this triangular shaped property.
Mr. Freitas said that he would check with his boss and attempt to locate his work
records that will show the time he left Perko's. Mr. Freitas said that he would
phone as soon as be was able to obtain the information.
Mr. Freitas stated that on January 4, 2003, his friend, Chris Rawley came to his
home to visit Mr. Freitas said that he told his friend ~at he saw the posters
indicating that Laci Peterson was missing, and that he recalled seeing her on
December 24, 2002. Mr. Freitas said that he telephoned the police while bis friend
was there to report what he saw. Mr. Freitas said that be talked to a female,
however he did not recall her name. Mr. Freitas said that Detectives have not
contacted him regarding this matter.
TF-MG024922
SLP09Sl02
EXHIBITD
EXHIBIT D
.1§.§ls:iak$ Ll..|l::..J|.x.,.l..:.4« l...|.|.r...v..J..3a.r\..........r.u.....:n1...nlh. “....qu
/
EXHIBIT E
EXHIBITE
,JAMES C. BRAZELTON
Di.strict Attorney
OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT A'ITORNEY ......

OF STANISLAUS COUNTY .:; ::·,-
r.O. Box 1346 ·,.
Modesto Califomi.'l. 95353
SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT #71
Case No.: 02-DA-0343
D.A. File No.: 1056770
Agency Name & No.: Modesto Police Department #02-1429S I
Rt-port of: Bill Grogan,. Criminal Investigator
Date ofSupplcmeot: July 29, 2004
Witness: Maldonado, Homer

WMA DOB 01-08-45
207 Phoenix Ave
Modesto, Ca.
(209) 544-1030
Witness: Maldonado, Helen

WFA DOB 03-05-48
207 Helen Ave
Modesto, Ca.
(209) 544-1030
Wilnt>ss: Wolf, Groce

WFA DOD 06-26-40
504 Phoeuix Ave
Modesto, Ca.
(209) 522-2128
Witness: Freitas, Tony

WMA UOD 11-13-58
1406 Cypress Ave
Modesto, Ca.
(209) 574-9943
Page 1
0~1912
Cuse No:
02-OA-0343
Report of:
Rill Grogan, C riminal Investigator
Da te o f S upplement : July 29, 2004
Defendant:
Peterson. Scott Lee
Synopsis:
. I inte~ewcd Hom~r Maldonado, Helen Maldonado, Uracc Wolf and Tony Freitas
regarding thetr sightings of Laci Peterson.
Narrati\•e:
On July 28, 2004 at 1540 hrs l contacted Homer and Helen Muldonndo at their residence.
Homer told me that on neecmhcr 24, 2002 he saw 1.aci Peterson and her dog near the
intersection ofCovcna Ave and Miller Avc. Homer said that he and his wife, I Ielcn, left their
residence at 0930 hrs on December 24, 2002. They stopped briefly next door at a neighbors
residence and dropped off a Christmas present.
·111ey then drove to a USA Mini-Mart gasoline station at the corner o f Camellia Ave and
Miller A,·e. Homer said his wife, Helen, went inside to pay for gasoline and to buy lottery
scratchers. Homer stayed outside to pump gnsoline into bis vehicle. While pumping gasoline,
Homer noticed an older dull brownish yellow van parked on ac the island across from his vehicle.
Homer did not see anyone near the vehicle nor was the vehicle receiving gasoline. Homer
dcscnbcd the vel1icle as older with ot least windows on the passenger side and rear doors. The
windows were co,·ered \\itJ1 while curtains. The van had a chrome ladder on the right rear door,
a spare tire with a meta.I covering painted the same color as the vehicle mounted on the left re-.i.r
door llJld o chrome rack on the roof. Romer believes the vehicle could have been a Chevrolet and
bad widows on the drivers side also, but he was not positive. Momenls later, a while male adull
in his late 40's or early 50's, 5-9 to 5-10, 150 10 I55lbs wearing a white t-shirt walked from the
market to the van. The man was very unkempt with a four to five day growth of facial hair.
Someone from within the van ~kt:tl the mall} l!dult if he got the cigs. The male adult replied, yes.
Hom:r could smell an odor ofcigarette smoke coming from the van, hut could not see anyone
inside the van. Homer said Helen walked from the market just as he finished putting the gasoline
inro 1heir vehicle. A'> Homer and He~ were gelting inlo I.be ,-chide, Helen made a comment to
Homer about smelling cigarette smoke. Homer started scratching his lottery scratchers that were
purchased by Helen. Homer looked up and the van was gone. Homer did not see the vehicle
leave the parking lot our did he see which side o f the van the male adult entered.
Homer said he left lh1: gasoline station sometime between 0945 and I 000 hrs. He drove
from the lot and made a left tum onto MiUer Ave. Homer drove one block 10 the intersection of
Miller Ave and Covcna Ave. As Homer was driving through the intersection he looked to his
right and noticed a dog and a very prclC) woman standing in the street on the west side ofCovena
Ave. The dog and woman were standing near the driveway ofthc second house north of Miller
A\·e. 'Joey were just east of the blue house number that was pttinted on the curb. Homer •
Page 2
L
Cnsc No:
02-DA-0343
Report or:
BilJ Grogan, Criminal lnve3tigator
described_ lhe woman as a young white female with brown hair just off the coUar. The woman
was wcanng a long sleeved white blouse nnd black pants. Homer could not remember what type
of shoi::s she ~s we~ng. Homer described the dog as a golden retriever, golden in color. Whal
drew Homer s attentJOn to the woman was her smile rutd she was so beautiful. Ho.mer said when
he first lookt.'CI at the woman she was facing south and the dog wa'> on a leash directly in front of
her. The dog turned around facing eastbound nnd stood on its back legs causing the woman to
face eastbound. Homer al that time could teU that the woman was very pregnant. The dog
looked very old and had white hair showing from its neck to stomach area. Homer asked Helem if
she saw the pregnant woman having trouble with her dog. Helen made the comment. "l hope she
doesn't fall.'' Hcltm said sbe oevcr saw the woman because she was pulling her money in her
wallet. Helen said she made the comment about hoping the woman didn't fall in response to her
husband's question.
Homer continued driving westbound on Miller Ave. He looked in his rear view mirror but
never observed the dog or "'-omao again. Homer also said he did not see the brownish yellow van
after it left the gasoline station.
Homer said days later, he saw a picture ofa burglary suspect in the Mod~to Bee. The
picture looked like the person he saw coming oul of the USA Gasoline Mini-Mart and walk
toward the brownish yellow vnu.
After observmg the woman, Homer drove straight to a co-worker's home on Grape Ave
to drop offa Christmas present. Homer then drove to Save Mart and Longs Drugs to shop.
Homer produced receipts showing be mac.le purchases al Save Mart at l I:33 A.M. and Longs
at 12:06 P. M. J3oth stores are located at 80 I Oakdale Rd.
Homer snid on Sunday, December 22, 2002 around I 100 hrs he was driving westbound on
La Loma Ave. At the intersection of La Loma Ave and Haddon Ave nCllr a small park he saw the
srune woman and dog walking westbound on Haddon Ave. The woman v,ac; dressed in the same
white blouse and black p:llllS as on December 24, 2002.
Between the morning of December 24, 2002 when .Homer .saw tlie wonW> and her dog on
Coverui Ave and Januacy J, 2003 Homer and Helen watched several news broadcasts and articles
written in the Modesto Bee surrounding the disawearanee of Laci Peterson. Homer, believing
the woman he observed on Covcna Ave was Laci Peterson, tclcphoaed the Modesto Police
Department to report his sighting. Homer stutcd that he was advised a detective would contac1
him al a later time. However, Horner w-dS never eontncted.
On Saturday, January J, 2003 after reading numerous articles in the Modesto Bee and
seeing several televisioa news broadcasts concerning the disappearance of Laci Peter:soa, Homer
Page 3
Case No:
02-DA-0343
Report of:
BilJ GrogH, Crimloal investigator
and Helen volunteered their assistance in the search for Laci Peterson. Homer and Helen
contacted officers a! the command post ond they were given posters with Laci's picture and an
area to search. Dunng the scnrch attempt they spoke to Sgt Ron Cloward and a Police Chaplin.
Homer told both about his sighting of Laci Peterson on December 24, 2002.
Homer and Helen decided to search an area oear Coral .Hollow Road and Highway 580.
They found n black bng that contained rags I.hut were red stained nnd wrapped in clear ph,stic.
They notified their findings to the Modesto Police .Department. Homer couJd not remember the
exact date he made the discovery. Homer stated he checked the Coral Rollow area because he
commutes to worked each day on Coml Hollow Road and occasionally f.CC.<; su.,;picious people
and vehicles. Homer said he once spotted a red Chevrolet Qunnro parked near Coral Hollow Rd
during the time officers were investigating the Yosemite Nationru Park homicide case. Homer
said he could smell something dead coming fiom the area of the vehiclc. Homer believes the
vehicle was parked io the area ofroad marker 8.1. Homer telephoned and wa.,; interviewed by the
F.BJ.
Homer said after comparing the photo of Laci Peterson in the newspaper, on television
news broadcasts and the posters he was given by the command post, he is sure the wom.in he saw
on December 22, 2002 and December 24, 2002 wns Laoi Peterson.
On July 29, 2004 l 530 hrs I madt: contact with Gract: Wolf at her residence.
Grace told me that on 0..-ccmbcr 24, 2002 bctw.::cn 0900 hrs and 1000 hrs but closer to
0930 hrs she ro:ide a sighting of Laci Peterson. Grace said she left her home shortly before 0900
hrs to drive her son, Terrell Price to a location on Morris Ave. After dropping her son o.ff she
slopped at Save Mart Markel on Ir' St. Grace then drove home easlbowtd on Eocina /\ve.
As Grace was driving eastbound on Encina Ave between Santa Barbaro Ave and Santa
Cruz Ave, Grace observed a woman walking her dog. Grace d~ribcd the woman as white ,vith
dark, above the shoulder length hair, !-he wearing white tennis shoes, black punts, a white blou.~
and a blue nylon jacket. The woman was walking a medium si;,,ed copper color dog westbound on
tbe north side ofEncina Ave. Grace said she made eye coolacl with the woman and they smiled
at each other. Grace did not see anyone else in the area
Grace said on Sunday, December 22, 2002 she was working in her yo.rd when the same
woman and dog, accompanied with a white male walked by her residence sometime between
1530 and 1600 hrs. The womau was wearing the same black pants and blue nylon jacket. The
man W3S holding the dog's leash. Grace exchanged hellos with the couple. The couple was
walking south on the west side of Phoenix Ave. Grace said they were holding hands and seemed
very happy. They both had beautiful smiles.
Page4
041 91-R
Case No:
02-DA-0343
Report of:
Bill Grogao, Crimioal lnve~tlgator
Date o( Supplement: July 29, 2004
Pho . GIJcc_sa; the couple again walking past her house southbound on the west side of
h ~o~ ;em ovember, before Thanksgiving, 2002. Grace said her granddaughter was with
;1
stcr ~ bri 0 yard. Grace's granddaughter told the couple that she liked their dog. The couple
op e Y and made a comment back and !hen continued on their w.tlk.
O.r~cc said shortly nflcr December 24, 2002 she started seeing articles in the Modesto Bee
and _teleV1S1on regarding the disappcaraoo: ofLaci Peterson. When she looked at the photos of
Laci and Scott Petcnon in tbc newspaper and on television she was convinocd that the couple that
walked by her residence in November and December 2002 were Scott and Laci Peterson. Grace
also is convinced that the woman she saw walking her dog on December 24, 2002 was Laci
Peterson.
Grace: said she read news ilrticles and watched television reports rcgnrding the
disappcamnce of Laci Peterson for days after December 24, 2002, the day she sighted Laci
walking west on Eneina Ave. Gr..icc wa.~ hesitant on reporting tht: incident to !he police because it
appeared to her that the media was discrediting anyone that reported seeing Laci Peterson.
Grace did tell her Physicians As.~stant, Greg Wilkerson who works for Dr. Rhoades about
her sighting of~ci Peterson on December 24, 2002. Greg told Gr:lee th:it she needed to can the
police or !he attorney. Groce could not remember wliat dote she visited Greg Wilkerson.
During a subsequent visit with Greg Wilkerson, Grace was told by Greg that he called the
attorney, regarding her sighting of Laci Peterson. A private investigator made contact with Grace
Wolf.
On July 29, 2004 l made contact with Tony Frietas at his residence.
Tony told me th.ii he is a truck driv~r for Orowheat Dread. His rvute takes him in the
mornings from Perko's Resturaot on Yosemite Blvd to Denny's Resturant at Downey Ave and
McHenry Ave. On December 24, 2002 he Jell Perko's sometime between 0935 and 0945 hrs.
Tony \\.'llS driving toward town on La Loma Aw. As Tony approached a small triangle grassy
park located at La Loma Ave and SnntaBnrbara Ave he observed n woman walking her dog.
Tony said be glanced to hie; left and saw the woman on the south side of La Lorna Ave across the
park. The woman wns a white female, 5-4 to 5-5 with dark shinny shoulder length hair. She was
wearing light colo~ pants and a dark colored jacket or pull•over sweater. Tony could not sec a
blouse or the t)1pe ofshoes that the woman was wearing. Tony said the dog was reddish bro'wll io
color ood the dog appeared to be pulling the woman.
Tony looked to his right and noticed two dirty looking males in the park. Tony said one
was a BMA and the 01her a HMA. The BMA was sitting on a bus bench and the I-IMA wns
Page 5
rl~l916
Case No: 02~DA~0343
Report of: Bill Grogan, Criminal lm•e~tigalor
Date of Supplement: Ju)y 29, 2004
squatting ocxt to the bench. The bus bench wa.<\ located on La Loma Ave ne>.1 lo the park. Hoth
males were dirty and their clothing ragged. The two males did not appear to fit the neighborhood.
On January 4, 2003 Tony was al his residence talking with lus friend, Chris Rawley. They
were discussing the posters with the photograph of Laci Peterson listed :is missing. Tony told
Chris that he relieved he saw Laci on December 24, 2002. Chris convinced Tony to call the
police and report his sighting oflaci Peterson. Tony called and spoke to a female at lbe
department. The female told Tony that a dcteclivc would call al a later date. A detective never
called.
hge6
fl419li
EXHIBIT F
EXHIBITF
‘ www _ _. . _ WW“??? 79W

‘- "' WW
:
' "V‘WW"—""‘“"
Ms.» -
"F"..‘E‘ ".~"-"-r""..:._".-:: Ra
/
I
T . : •~
. -~r
y2111r,
•- ~
-n ~:;ll
-
~ • ·1 r-:~ : .,.... ~
- .· ~
,
-:, ~~~
-c.:.· ·-
- l
~~
,...-:•
~
-
• #• - I -
,.-
~- - - ~- -- ~- ~- ~-
- ---- _...,.' .,..,,_.,,..
- ~ -=
}• - •·>Jf
·-- - . ~~
D m11 t:"-
~
~ -
~ GIi
- ~:!:I. -
~-
•.• 'JII -
~- -~::!-:- -
-
~
. ·- -
t:·- - • J 11111r • • r, ,,, ..
e ; . -- : ~ _ · · ;!:..._-- -
·-'- ~ - r ~
..
&L., JOt1 111.-lOft Ollc.J01,I, Ap,JOtl '" -• '-'J01.• i,ap)OU Ap,JOU .._x,o,f NIIIJOOl ._I
. -.
H
.1... .29.
min-ma
ax mu
7
_:
‘_.—
‘(T‘W- a! '- ‘
‘ 555
Sunh Eva-nah ”an! Q O d
I
_
;.m.
.._ .n '..
..H'w
untold! , mmwnoau
5':
W
an“. n‘ many
”'1
ii'
"
'7'”
B WWII!
r "I §-_ '
I
II
‘ '
-.'I '._"
-. v II. E.
I
M
EXHIBIT G
EXHIBITG
I, Tony Freitas, declare as follows,
1) In December 2002, I worked at Orowheat as a delivery person.
My usual run takes me along Yosemite Blvd. in Modesto and then up La
Loma Avenue.
2) The morning of December 24, 2002, I was driving my usual run.
Just near where Miller Ave. intersects with la Loma there is a small park.
There I saw a woman, just near the intersection walking in the same
direction I was driving. She was on my left, so I could see her from the
driver's side. It was her shiny hair that first caught my attention. I got a
pretty good look because I was slowing down at the Miller Street
intersection, and I got to see her face. My driver's side window was open,
and I had a clear view. The face I saw was the same face I later saw on the
missing posters identified as Laci Peterson. I am not sure of the exact
time I saw Laci walking her dog that morning but based on my route I know
that it was after 9:45 a.m.. I believe it was sometime between 9:45 a.m.
and 10:15 a.m ..
# SLP410761
3) The woman's dog was energetic. It was a little smaller than my
own dog which is a German Shepherd. Her dog was walking fast, and I
recall thinking, "poor girl being that heavily pregnant and having a dog with
so much energy." The dog was brownish, darker than tan, and had
retriever length hair.
4) The first time I saw a photo of Laci Peterson was on the posters
stapled to the trees along La Loma, and around the same time, just near my
house, there was also a huge poster of her in the window of a hair salon
business. Those posters went up right away after her disappearance.
Once I saw these posters, I realized that this was the same woman I had
seen Christmas Eve morning. My initial reaction when I saw a photo
properly was "Oh gosh this is her." I don't think I saw photos of the dog.
5) I told my friend Chris Rawley that I had seen the missing woman.
It was Chris who actually made the first call to police about my sighting of
Laci, but he used my name. Chris is more assertive than me, and I was
reluctant to call at first, because I tend to keep out of things.
Jk
SLP410762
6) I did not receive a call back from the police. Chris asked me what
the police response had been to the initial call and was taken back that I
had not received a call back. His reaction was like ''You're kidding me?"
Chris reminded me that if the missing person had been a family member or
someone close I would have wanted people like myself to call in. I never
received a call back from the police. I then called police a second time. I
never received a call back from police.
7) I was interviewed by defense investigator Mr. E-Fm<>iaR-in early
January 2003. I provided the defense with delivery invoices from
December 24, 2002. Each invoice has the date and time printed on it.
However they were not helpful because some times towards the end of the
year, in that last week before Christmas, the company has to re-set
computers and the times do not match the actually delivery time, The ,_. A
A jl/J~~llet./J t!crm-4' '/I?( bU -9.S,,v
times printed out on the Invoice can be off by an houri,_ The invoices had -;;.~_;~ -
the delivery times either a hour earlier or a hour later than the correct 1·
time.
SLP410763
8) In October 2004, I received a subpoena from Scott Peterson's
defense. I can't recall how I received the subpoena, whether it was by
mail or hand delivered. I was also interviewed by Mr. Grogan, the DA's
p,e~~
investigator, in 2004. He came to my house. This was my first and only
contact with anyone from the prosecution.
9) When I appeared on the date of the subpoena, I was interviewed
by Mr. Geragos and several others from the defense team. They
questioned me about the morning of December 24. After this period of
questioning, we took a break and they came back and told me "We aren't
going to use you." No explanation was given.
10) I still believe to this day that I saw Laci Peterson that morning.
As I said to one of the investigators back then, and as I remain today, I am
99.9 %sure.
11) I would have been available to testify to these facts if called as a
witness at Mr. Peterson's trial.~
SLP410764
12) On July 19, 2008, I was interviewed by Rachel Sommerville, who
identified herself as an investigator working on behalf of Scott Lee
Peterson's defense. The facts stated in this declaration are the facts I
gave Ms. Sommerville, and are based on my own personal knowledge.
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true to the
Tony Freitas
SLP410765
PROOF OF SERVICE
that the following is true and
I, the undersigned, hereby declare under penalty of perjury
correct:
I am over l8 years of age, not a party in the case, and my business address is 1800 Paseo
Rancho Castilla, Los Angeles CA 90032.
In the above-entitled matter, on January 2024, I caused a copy of the within:
Defendant’s Motion for Post-Conviction Discovery Pursuant to Penal Code section 1054.9, and
the supporting Memorandum of Points and Authorities, Declarations, and Exhibits to be served
on the following:
10
Stanislaus County District Attomey’s Oice
11
Birgit Fladager
12 832 12th Street #300
Modesto, CA 95354
13
14
15
16
17
M14713”

Scott Peterson Motion 2024

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Scott Peterson Motion 2024

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Scott Peterson Motion 2024

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

1/17/2024

LOS ANGELES INNOCENCE PROJECT

8 Attorneys for Defendant Scott Peterson

11 FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN MATEO

12 ) CASE NO.: SC055500A

Dated: 2024 Respectfully submitted,

15 B. Lt. Xavier Aponte Reports .........................................................................................26

1, 64; Strickler v. Greene (1999) 527 U.S. 263, 281.)

herein, without delay.

Dated: Januar3l_, 2024 Respectful] submi ed,

2 I, Paula M. Mitchell, hereby state and declare,

10 the exonerated after they are free.

DECLARATTONARATlON OF PAULA M. MITCHELL

2 claim of actual innocence that is supported by newly discovered evidence.

DECLARATIONARATION OF PAULA M. MITCHELL

DECLARATIONARATION OF PAULA M. MITCHELL

8 Executed on January 16, 2024, in Los Angeles, California.

DECLARATIONARATION OF PAULA M. MITCHELL

The Honorable Jeff Laugero

Re: People v. Scott Peterson

The requests herein fall into the following categories:

Los Angeles Innocence Project

a. Audio and video recordings of the interviews MPD conducted with

b. All MPD investigation and other police reports memorializing the

Los Angeles Innocence Project

d. All reports, notes, computer generated data and results, Informed

Los Angeles Innocence Project

e. A complete copy of the handwritten notes and all other materials

f. Identification of the MPD vehicles in which Todd and Pearce were

g. Handwritten notes taken by MPD officers who interviewed Steven

Los Angeles Innocence Project

h. All other interviews, recordings, and contacts made by MPD and/or

i. All MPD and other law enforcement agency reports, notes,

(2) The report from the arresting officer;

Reason for believing items exist: See Bates 20406.

Los Angeles Innocence Project

k. All audio and/or video recordings and written witness interview

I. All reports, interviews, audio and/or video recordings following up on

L-Os Angeles Innocence Project

m. All reports, notes, interviews, recordings, and/or any other documents

n. MPD's reports, notes and other records documenting the investigative

Los Angeles Innocence Project

o. Cell phone records obtained by law enforcement for Donald Glenn

p. A copy of Donald Glenn Pearce's receipt for the purchase of a Nokia

Reason for believing items exist: See Bates 4121.

q. MPD police investigation reports, arrest reports, notes, recordings,

Reason/or believing items exist: See Bates 20362; 4115.

r. All recordings, interview memoranda, audio and video recordings,

s. All reports, notes, interviews, audio/video recordings and transcripts

Los Angeles Innocence Project

Los Angeles Innocence Project

t. Reports, notes, photographs, audio/video recordings and transcripts

(4) Photographs of recovered property taken by CSO Hodson.

Reason for believing items exist: See Bates 413 1.

u. Police reports and/or notes documenting investigative steps taken in

Los Angeles Innocence Project

(a) Any attempted identifications by Ms. Jackson of the men

Los Angeles Innocence Project

(c) All reports, notes, or other documentation regarding Linda