Peyer Prosecutors Answer Arguments on Moving Murder Trial

Prosecutors argued Tuesday against moving the murder trial of former CHP Officer Craig Peyer and challenged arguments by defense attorneys who said that Peyer’s former status as a peace officer would make it impossible for him to receive a fair trial in San Diego County.

Deputy Dist. Atty. Thomas McArdle filed the prosecution’s arguments in Superior Court in response to motions filed Friday by Peyer’s attorneys, Diane Campbell and Robert Grimes.

Besides asking for a change of venue, the defense attorneys also asked Judge Richard Huffman to suppress evidence gathered by police when Peyer consented to several searches and interrogations, and to exclude testimony of 19 young women who testified against Peyer at a preliminary hearing in April.

Peyer, 37, is charged with killing San Diego State University student Cara Knott, 20, on Dec. 27. Police said that Knott was strangled that night between 9 and 10 p.m. on a bridge near Interstate 15 and Mercy Road. Her body was thrown 75 feet into a dry creek bed, where it was found at 8:30 a.m. the next day. Peyer is free on $1 million bail that he raised with the assistance of family and friends. He was dismissed by the California Highway Patrol.

The 19 young women who testified at Peyer’s preliminary hearing said that Peyer forced them to stop at night at the isolated off-ramp where Knott was slain. Though the women said that Peyer never threatened or touched them, some said they were concerned by the length of the stops, which lasted as long as an hour and 40 minutes.

Prior Peace Officer Trials Mentioned

In the documents filed Tuesday by the district attorney’s office, McArdle noted that at least eight police officers have been prosecuted over the years in the county and have received fair trials, including Escondido officer David DeLange and National City officer Craig Short. DeLange was prosecuted for killing a woman who was taken hostage by a bank robber; Short was prosecuted for killing a teen-age purse snatcher. Both officers were acquitted.

McArdle criticized Peyer’s attorneys for “implying” that the prosecution of an officer is “unique.”

“On the contrary, it is almost commonplace in this county,” McArdle said in the court documents. “(Peyer’s) former peace officer status does not make him unique, nor does it make him a social leper who is unlikely to get a fair trial in this county.”

McArdle argued that San Diego County--with a population of 2.2 million, the second largest in the state--has a large enough jury pool to afford Peyer a fair trial and that publicity about the killing has dropped since Peyer’s preliminary hearing in April.

“When publicity has subsided some months before trial, a change of venue is usually denied. . . . The essential point is that jury selection and trial will be held many months after the last flurry of publicity has subsided,” the documents said.

Peyer’s trial is scheduled to begin in January with the lengthy process of jury selection.

Police Searches Not Proved Illegal

In arguing against the defense motion to suppress evidence, McArdle said Peyer’s attorneys failed to prove that police searches that led to the evidence were illegal. On Jan. 8 and 9, Peyer agreed to be interviewed by detectives and consented to police searches of his home, pickup truck and CHP locker. The searches were conducted without a warrant, and Peyer was interviewed without an attorney present.

Peyer’s attorneys charged that police interrogators coerced him into making incriminating statements and called the searches unlawful.

Peyer never confessed to the slaying, however, so defense attorneys have no grounds to ask that Peyer’s statements be suppressed, McArdle argued. The prosecution’s case against Peyer is not built solely on statements he gave to police but should be judged on the “preponderance of evidence” gathered by investigators, McArdle said.

McArdle suggested that Peyer’s consent to the searches and interviews could have been influenced by the knowledge that investigators may have already gathered evidence that tied him to the crime.

Miranda Rights at Issue

Peyer’s attorneys said that, on Jan. 8, Peyer was interrogated for more than seven hours and had talked with police for more than four hours before he was read his Miranda rights, which he waived. The attorneys said that statements given by Peyer to police “were obtained through psychologically coercive means.”

But McArdle suggested that Peyer may have given incriminating statements even after he was read his Miranda rights.

“Moreover, a defendant’s uncoerced statements which are inadmissible because of police failure to give a Miranda warning will no longer make the defendant’s subsequent statements--after a Miranda warning and waiver--inadmissible,” said the court documents filed by McArdle.

On Tuesday, prosecutors didn’t reply to the defense motion to exclude testimony of the 19 women who testified at Peyer’s preliminary hearing. McArdle said a response will likely be filed later this week or next.