Scott Says Laci Knew of Affair With Frey

This is a partial transcript from "On the Record" with Greta Van Susteren, August 11, 2004, that has been edited for clarity.

Watch "On the Record" every weeknight at 10 p.m. ET!

GRETA VAN SUSTEREN, HOST: Joining us now is Amber Frey's lawyer, Gloria Allred. Gloria, we listened to what I would characterize as a grilling cross-examination by your client to Scott Peterson, at least on the January 6 phone calls. How much -- were the police there when she was making those phone calls?

GLORIA ALLRED, AMBER FREY'S ATTORNEY: I can't comment on that. We'll have to wait for that to come out through the testimony.

VAN SUSTEREN: All right. Well, they're made late at night, right, at 11:00 -- the one on January 6, 11:02, and then....

ALLRED: At 11:02, exactly. I call that the "jig is up" tape.

VAN SUSTEREN: All right. And that's because that's the first time that Scott says, I lied to you, I was married.

ALLRED: Yes. And why can't he tell her more? She keeps trying to get more answers, and he doesn't give her direct answers. and I think the fact that he does give varying explanations and doesn't give a direct answer, then I think an inference could be drawn by the jury that he may think that any answer he might give might tend to incriminate him.

VAN SUSTEREN: Would it make a difference, Gloria -- I mean, I know that his house was searched about December 25 or 26. Would it make a difference if a lawyer had spoken to him and said, don't talk about this? Because that's what defense lawyers say to every single person whose house is searched, don't talk to -- don't say anything about it. Would that make a difference?

ALLRED: Well, as a matter of fact, it sounds to me as though maybe he has spoken to a lawyer, which, of course, is his right. But you know, at one point in the tapes, Greta, he says -- Amber says, If you trust me, why can't you share this information with me? And he says, because you would share it with everyone. And then Amber said, Oh, I would share it with everyone? And Scott said, you would, and you would have to.

Well, it seems likely to me that he knows if he does tell her something, that that information might end up in a court of law, and it sounds to me as though he wouldn't want that to happen.

VAN SUSTEREN: Well, then explain to me why, when she says, should I go to the police, he doesn't say, no, don't go to the police, he says, essentially, use your own judgment? He could have put a lot of pressure on her to say, don't talk to the police, but he didn't. He said, use your own judgment.

ALLRED: Well, he may understand that if he does try to prevent her from going to the police, first of all, it might be futile, and secondly, that certainly would be very, very serious for him.

VAN SUSTEREN: But he doesn't...

(CROSSTALK)

ALLRED: I don't think he'd get anywhere.

VAN SUSTEREN: He doesn't know he's being tape.

ALLRED: I don't think he would get anywhere with that. It seems as though he's trying to be very, very cautious on the tapes, but I do think that his answers on the tapes are, in many ways, quite revealing.

VAN SUSTEREN: All right, Gloria, stand by. Let's bring in the rest of our panel. Joining us in Redwood City, defense attorney Nancy Luque and former San Francisco assistant D.A. Jim Hammer. Both Nancy and Jim were in court today. In Washington, defense attorney and former D.C. homicide detective Ted Williams. And in Miami is defense attorney Yale Galanter.

Nancy, you were in court today. Your thoughts, disagree with Gloria or agree with her?

NANCY LUQUE, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Well, I disagree very strongly about one thing. There was a lot of information given by Scott Peterson on the tape today. He didn't do it. He didn't do it. He didn't do it. He had nothing to do with his wife's disappearance.

He was shocked that Amber Frey would be suggesting that. He was quite clear. Never once all day did he falter in that. Never once did he come close to saying anything incriminating, anything directly or indirectly incriminating.

Never once did he come close to suggesting his wife was anything but abducted. There was no suggestion on his part that anyone was dead, at that point.

VAN SUSTEREN: But did he answer -- but did he answer...

(CROSSTALK)

LUQUE: It was incredible. I mean, it sounded...

(CROSSTALK)

VAN SUSTEREN: She pushed him, Nancy, for details, and he backed off. But I mean, she kept -- it was actually an interesting grueling cross-examination because, at one point, finally, he said something December 24, he went fishing. I mean, she finally did get that out of him.

LUQUE: But remember, she pushed for details about the nature of the relationship, also. I mean, there were a lot of details she was pushing for that had nothing to do with a murder case. In fact, nothing I heard today had anything to do with a murder case. It had to do with perhaps an adultery allegation. But where's the evidence?

ALLRED: Well, Greta...

VAN SUSTEREN: Jim...

(CROSSTALK)

VAN SUSTEREN: Let me bring Jim in. Jim, you were there, too.

JIM HAMMER, FORMER ASST. SAN FRANCISCO D.A.: I agree with Nancy to some degree, but I think it is damning. You know, if I had someone on cross-examination as a prosecutor -- and I've had cases I thought I was going to lose, defendant took the stand, and they screwed up on the stand.

There are two bad things defendants do. They lie on the stand, and juries hate that. And they don't answer logical questions they should be able to answer. When you dodge repeatedly, you look suspicious. If someone doesn't have something to hide, they usually answer the questions.

I can't help but think, sitting in the courtroom, that hour by hour,the jury hates Scott Peterson more and more. Now, do they just hate him because he's an adulterer and a liar or because they think he's a murderer? I think the jury's out on that still, Greta.

VAN SUSTEREN: What -- I mean, is there any sort of -- I was listening to the tape, and I wondered why he didn't answer the questions. He didn't know he was being taped. He thought this was his confidante...

HAMMER: Right.

VAN SUSTEREN: ... although there certainly is tension between these two because he certainly has been anything but nice to her. But what if someone -- what if he'd talked to a lawyer after the search warrant and what if the lawyer said...

HAMMER: It'd make a huge difference.

VAN SUSTEREN: Huge difference?

HAMMER: That'd be a great defense. And I think Scott's not going to take the stand. I wish he would, for the prosecution. He's not going to take the stand. I don't know how they get into evidence -- and one other observation ... from court. We watched the jury. The jury laughed ... especially when he said, I told Laci about it. One of the jurors burst out in laughter today.

VAN SUSTEREN: And let me...

HAMMER: But another juror was doing this, Greta, thumbing the thick transcript and going, oh, my God, when is this over? I don't think that's a good sign for the prosecution.

VAN SUSTEREN: Except that I don't know how you read that. But let -- you talked about that -- the whole issue about whether Laci knew about the affair.

HAMMER: Right.

VAN SUSTEREN: And this is what Scott said on the tape. We'll put it up on the screen. This was the question between Amber and Scott.

Amber Frey, "But I'm saying now, was Laci aware of the situation about me?" Peterson, "Yes." Frey, "She was?" Peterson, "Yes." Frey, "Really? How did she respond to it?" Peterson said, "Fine." Frey, "Fine?" Peterson said, "Yes." Frey, "An eight-month-pregnant woman fine about another woman?" Peterson, "You don't know all the facts, Amber. You don't know all the facts."

Frey, "Oh, she was OK with it, but you -- you continued to lie to me and couldn't be with me in the holidays, but she was OK, she was fine with knowing about me?" Peterson, "Yes."

Yale, what do you make of that dialogue between these two? I mean...

YALE GALANTER, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: I don't think there's...

VAN SUSTEREN: ... Scott says she knew about it.

GALANTER: Greta, I don't think there's a word that Scott says in all

these tapes that's truthful or meaningful. My impression of the tapes is this is a guy who's interested in having an affair, getting a girl in the sack, and biding time between their liaisons and just filling it with chatter. I don't think any of these words mean anything.

VAN SUSTEREN: All right, Ted...

GALANTER: And I don't think the jurors think that this adds to the

case at all. I agree with Jim. I mean, what this puts the icing on is

that he's a cad and he had an affair and was very good at lying to his wife and lying to Amber.

WILLIAMS: Greta, to make a long story...

VAN SUSTEREN: Ted, you got 30 seconds. Go ahead.

WILLIAMS: OK. To make a long story short, I agree with Yale and Jim.

Gloria can put every kind of spin she wants on this, but the fact about it is, this is all about sex right now. And if this is all they've got, I wonder if Mark Geragos should even ask any questions, if they don't ask any more than what they've asked.

VAN SUSTEREN: All right, I'm going to let Gloria respond to you when

we come back, but we need to take a quick break. Panel, stand by.

Up next, we're going to play some of the revealing tapes from Scott

Peterson's phone calls to Amber Frey. And later: Jurors were glued to the tapes and laughing out loud, at least at one instance. More reaction coming up.

Content and Programming Copyright 2004 Fox News Network, L.L.C. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Transcription Copyright 2004 eMediaMillWorks, Inc. (f/k/a Federal Document Clearing House, Inc.), which takes sole responsibility for the accuracy of the transcription. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. No license is granted to the user of this material except for the user's personal or internal use and, in such case, only one copy may be printed, nor shall user use any material for commercial purposes or in any fashion that may infringe upon Fox News Network, L.L.C.'s and eMediaMillWorks, Inc.'s copyrights or other proprietary rights or interests in the material. This is not a legal transcript for purposes of litigation.