|
|
Post by Maggie on Sept 28, 2005 11:14:06 GMT -5
Ex-attorney for Peterson to pen book Lawyer left law firm before trial started By GARTH STAPLEY BEE STAFF WRITER Last Updated: September 28, 2005, 07:01:01 AM PDT An attorney who abruptly left Scott Peterson's defense camp before his 2004 double-murder trial will write a book about the case, Atria Books announced. Matt Dalton departed the Los Angeles law firm of Geragos & Geragos for undisclosed reasons in late September 2003 — a month before Peterson's preliminary hearing got under way in Modesto. The trial later moved to Redwood City, where jurors in December sentenced Peterson to death for killing his wife, Laci, and their unborn son, Conner. Before Dalton's departure, he met with Peterson "almost daily" in the Stanislaus County Jail, according to an Atria release. "What Dalton has uncovered will astound even Scott Peterson's harshest critics and challenge their most deeply held beliefs about what really happened," the statement reads. In August 2003, Dalton ignored a court-imposed gag order to outline a human sacrifice theory in front of two Bee journalists. He was gone the next month. Dalton is writing "Presumed Guilty" with author Bonnie Hearn Hill, who leads a private writers' workshop in Fresno and teaches online fiction classes for Writer's Digest School. The book will be released Dec.13, according to Atria. www.modbee.com/local/story/1...-12028500c.htmlThe full title is: Dalton, Matt and Bonnie Hearn Hill. PRESUMED GUILTY: What You Didn't Hear About Laci Peterson's Murder, And Why Scott Peterson Should Not Be on Death Row |
|
|
|
Post by rain on Sept 28, 2005 11:23:09 GMT -5
Ex-attorney for Peterson to pen book Lawyer left law firm before trial started By GARTH STAPLEY BEE STAFF WRITER Last Updated: September 28, 2005, 07:01:01 AM PDT An attorney who abruptly left Scott Peterson's defense camp before his 2004 double-murder trial will write a book about the case, Atria Books announced. Matt Dalton departed the Los Angeles law firm of Geragos & Geragos for undisclosed reasons in late September 2003 — a month before Peterson's preliminary hearing got under way in Modesto. The trial later moved to Redwood City, where jurors in December sentenced Peterson to death for killing his wife, Laci, and their unborn son, Conner. Before Dalton's departure, he met with Peterson "almost daily" in the Stanislaus County Jail, according to an Atria release. "What Dalton has uncovered will astound even Scott Peterson's harshest critics and challenge their most deeply held beliefs about what really happened," the statement reads. In August 2003, Dalton ignored a court-imposed gag order to outline a human sacrifice theory in front of two Bee journalists. He was gone the next month. Dalton is writing "Presumed Guilty" with author Bonnie Hearn Hill, who leads a private writers' workshop in Fresno and teaches online fiction classes for Writer's Digest School. The book will be released Dec.13, according to Atria. www.modbee.com/local/story/1...-12028500c.htmlThe full title is: Dalton, Matt and Bonnie Hearn Hill. PRESUMED GUILTY: What You Didn't Hear About Laci Peterson's Murder, And Why Scott Peterson Should Not Be on Death Row Is this just another 'gold-digger' trying to get rich off of this case??? I would think that would make everyone here very upset.  |
|
|
|
Post by Maggie on Sept 28, 2005 11:28:34 GMT -5
I hope he makes a zillion dollars.
At least he has actually talked to Scott, multiple times, and was actually involved in the investigation.
That makes him more credible than anyone else who has written a book............... BY FAR.
|
|
|
|
Post by truth1 on Sept 28, 2005 14:57:58 GMT -5
I hope he makes a zillion dollars. At least he has actually talked to Scott, multiple times, and was actually involved in the investigation. That makes him more credible than anyone else who has written a book............... BY FAR. Maggie, you have to be kidding me.  You have so many double-standards it makes people dizzy when they talk to you. You were complaining about the doctor writing a book and making money off of "another person's misery", but, yet, you support his book. You support anyone that writes a book that thinks Scott is innocent--however, if the book says otherwise, the author is greedy and motivated by money. Is the attorney giving the money to Laci's family for expenses? |
|
|
|
Post by Maggie on Sept 29, 2005 11:32:12 GMT -5
I hope he makes a zillion dollars. At least he has actually talked to Scott, multiple times, and was actually involved in the investigation. That makes him more credible than anyone else who has written a book............... BY FAR. Maggie, you have to be kidding me. You have so many double-standards it makes people dizzy when they talk to you. You were complaining about the doctor writing a book and making money off of "another person's misery", but, yet, you support his book. You support anyone that writes a book that thinks Scott is innocent--however, if the book says otherwise, the author is greedy and motivated by money. Is the attorney giving the money to Laci's family for expenses? Truth-- Ablow never even met Scott. Dalton knows him personally. Dalton was very involved in the investigation. Big difference. I'm not talking about the money. I'm talking about credibility. |
|
|
|
Post by truth1 on Sept 29, 2005 14:11:48 GMT -5
Maggie, you have to be kidding me. You have so many double-standards it makes people dizzy when they talk to you. You were complaining about the doctor writing a book and making money off of "another person's misery", but, yet, you support his book. You support anyone that writes a book that thinks Scott is innocent--however, if the book says otherwise, the author is greedy and motivated by money. Is the attorney giving the money to Laci's family for expenses? Truth-- Ablow never even met Scott. Dalton knows him personally. Dalton was very involved in the investigation. Big difference. I'm not talking about the money. I'm talking about credibility. You WERE talking about money before. Byrd knew him better than Dalton. It is fun to see you back peddling. |
|
|
|
Post by Maggie on Sept 30, 2005 8:24:53 GMT -5
Truth-- Ablow never even met Scott. Dalton knows him personally. Dalton was very involved in the investigation. Big difference. I'm not talking about the money. I'm talking about credibility. You WERE talking about money before. Byrd knew him better than Dalton. It is fun to see you back peddling. Truth, Anne Bird was not part of the investigation, nor is she credible. That's all I'm going to say about it. I'll buy Dalton's book.... if you don't want to--- don't. |
|
|
|
Post by truth1 on Sept 30, 2005 9:20:51 GMT -5
You WERE talking about money before. Byrd knew him better than Dalton. It is fun to see you back peddling. Truth, Anne Bird was not part of the investigation, nor is she credible. That's all I'm going to say about it. I'll buy Dalton's book.... if you don't want to--- don't. It is hilarious--according to you, the only credible people are the ones that think Peterson is innocent. |
|
|
|
Post by tikarose on Oct 1, 2005 17:22:20 GMT -5
Just because Byrd is part blood relative to Scott doesn't prove she KNOWS Scott. If I knew Scott, or even though I don't, I wouldn't be writing such trash as she wrote about him. Even if I thought him guilty. There was absolutely nothing but more SPECULATION in that book, and I question her motives. Bryd hangs around with the likes of Catherine Crier, Nancy Grace, etc and has turned on her own kin, I wouldn't trust her any further than I could throw her. She's no expert on Scott. It says volumes about a person when they don't mind kicking people who are already down. I'll buy Dalton's book as well. Truth-- Ablow never even met Scott. Dalton knows him personally. Dalton was very involved in the investigation. Big difference. I'm not talking about the money. I'm talking about credibility. You WERE talking about money before. Byrd knew him better than Dalton. It is fun to see you back peddling. |
|
|
|
Post by WaterLilly on Oct 1, 2005 18:55:28 GMT -5
I have purchased ALL the books about Scott and this case. Out of curiosity and to see if I could pull something out of them to help Scott in some way. I will buy this one too! ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by Maggie on Oct 1, 2005 19:53:51 GMT -5
Just because Byrd is part blood relative to Scott doesn't prove she KNOWS Scott. If I knew Scott, or even though I don't, I wouldn't be writing such trash as she wrote about him. Even if I thought him guilty. There was absolutely nothing but more SPECULATION in that book, and I question her motives. Bryd hangs around with the likes of Catherine Crier, Nancy Grace, etc and has turned on her own kin, I wouldn't trust her any further than I could throw her. She's no expert on Scott. It says volumes about a person when they don't mind kicking people who are already down. I'll buy Dalton's book as well. |
|
|
|
Post by truth1 on Oct 3, 2005 8:47:22 GMT -5
Just because Byrd is part blood relative to Scott doesn't prove she KNOWS Scott. If I knew Scott, or even though I don't, I wouldn't be writing such trash as she wrote about him. Even if I thought him guilty. There was absolutely nothing but more SPECULATION in that book, and I question her motives. Bryd hangs around with the likes of Catherine Crier, Nancy Grace, etc and has turned on her own kin, I wouldn't trust her any further than I could throw her. She's no expert on Scott. It says volumes about a person when they don't mind kicking people who are already down. I'll buy Dalton's book as well. You WERE talking about money before. Byrd knew him better than Dalton. It is fun to see you back peddling. So, you think that this guy, who talked with Peterson for a few years knows him better than his sister? |
|
|
|
Post by truth1 on Oct 3, 2005 8:48:04 GMT -5
Just because Byrd is part blood relative to Scott doesn't prove she KNOWS Scott. If I knew Scott, or even though I don't, I wouldn't be writing such trash as she wrote about him. Even if I thought him guilty. There was absolutely nothing but more SPECULATION in that book, and I question her motives. Bryd hangs around with the likes of Catherine Crier, Nancy Grace, etc and has turned on her own kin, I wouldn't trust her any further than I could throw her. She's no expert on Scott. It says volumes about a person when they don't mind kicking people who are already down. I'll buy Dalton's book as well. Of course you agree--(deleted by suzanne) |
|
|
|
Post by sclcookie on Oct 3, 2005 10:11:52 GMT -5
Just because Byrd is part blood relative to Scott doesn't prove she KNOWS Scott. If I knew Scott, or even though I don't, I wouldn't be writing such trash as she wrote about him. Even if I thought him guilty. There was absolutely nothing but more SPECULATION in that book, and I question her motives. Bryd hangs around with the likes of Catherine Crier, Nancy Grace, etc and has turned on her own kin, I wouldn't trust her any further than I could throw her. She's no expert on Scott. It says volumes about a person when they don't mind kicking people who are already down. I'll buy Dalton's book as well. So, you think that this guy, who talked with Peterson for a few years knows him better than his sister? Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't his sister meet him a few years prior to Laci's and Conner's murder? |
|
|
|
Post by smoke52020 on Oct 3, 2005 16:14:41 GMT -5
Byrd wrote the book clearly for money and to hurt Jackie. She was given up for adoption by Jackie and was never a part of the Peterson family until shortly before Laci disappeared. She DID NOT know Scott, so her and the book that she wrote are not credible.
I may possibly buy the former attorney book ONLY because he met face to face with Scott and I assume was provided information that never made it to the public.
|
|
You have so many double-standards it makes people dizzy when they talk to you. You were complaining about the doctor writing a book and making money off of "another person's misery", but, yet, you support his book. You support anyone that writes a book that thinks Scott is innocent--however, if the book says otherwise, the author is greedy and motivated by money. Is the attorney giving the money to Laci's family for expenses? 