Peyer’s Bail Cut From $1 Million to $250,000

Bail for former CHP Officer Craig Peyer, accused of killing a 20-year-old San Diego college student, was reduced to $250,000 Wednesday from $1 million after a judge rejected prosecution arguments that Peyer should be jailed pending a second trial because he is a danger to the community.

Superior Court Judge Richard D. Huffman, who presided over Peyer’s first trial that ended in a hung jury last week, said he will preside over the second trial and set April 18 for the beginning of jury selection. Peyer, who is charged with murder in the December, 1986, slaying of Cara Knott, was arrested Jan. 15, 1987, and has been free on $1 million bail since March 4, 1987.

While Peyer’s bail was reduced substantially, he still faces a sizable financial burden that requires him to pay a $100,000 premium on the $1-million bail, which expires Friday. In addition to the $100,000 premium, Peyer may also be forced to pay a $25,000 premium on the new, lower bail, said defense attorney Robert Grimes. The premiums are interest-free.

Making Monthly Payments

In arguing for a lower bail, Grimes said that Peyer is making monthly payments on the $100,000 premium, which is non-refundable. If Spencer Douglas Insurance Associates--the company carrying the $1 million bond and which will probably carry the $250,000 bond--requires the $25,000 premium, Peyer may also have to make monthly payments on that.

Deputy Dist. Atty. Joseph Van Orshoven, citing a law that became effective Jan. 1, argued unsuccessfully that bail for Peyer should be based on whether he is a threat to public safety. Peyer is dangerous, argued Van Orshoven, and should be locked up.

“The principal consideration of fixing bail is that of public safety,” said Van Orshoven. In an attempt to support his argument, Van Orshoven said that Robert Calderwood, who was a surprise prosecution witness at Peyer’s first trial, waited a year before stepping forward because he feared for his safety and that of his family while Peyer was free on bail.

“What you’re suggesting is that I need to lock Mr. Peyer up to preserve public safety,” said Huffman.

Hardship Claimed

Grimes, who said that the $1-million bail was proving to be a hardship to family members who helped post Peyer’s bail, challenged Van Orshoven to produce potential new witnesses who are afraid to step forward while Peyer is free on bail. He charged that it was speculation on Van Orshoven’s part that jailing Peyer would make it possible for new witnesses to come forward.

Huffman pointed out that Peyer was jailed between Jan. 15 and March 4, 1987, but Calderwood waited 14 months from the time of Knott’s killing before contacting authorities. Calderwood testified that he saw a California Highway Patrol cruiser stop a car similar to the one Knott was driving at the same off-ramp where authorities allege she was strangled by Peyer on the night of Dec. 27, 1986.

However, Calderwood’s testimony was discredited during questioning by Grimes.

“Bail is not a punitive measure,” said Huffman, after listening to Van Orshoven’s argument. “ . . .I’m obligated to give the defendant (the opportunity) to offer evidence as what reasonable bond is.”

The judge then listened to the testimony of Linda Carol Power, vice president of Spencer Douglas, who testified about four properties posted to secure Peyer’s corporate surety bond. Each of the properties, which are owned by Peyer and his wife, Peyer’s parents, and Peyer’s in-laws, has a $1-million lien against it, giving each property negative equity, Power said.

Makes Weekly Check

Most bonding companies that issue a corporate surety bond require the defendant to check in every day. However, Power said that Peyer is only required to call her office on Tuesdays to report on his whereabouts.

After listening to Power’s testimony, Huffman ruled that Peyer’s $1-million bail was excessive and noted that most homicide cases of a similar nature carry a $250,000 bail. At the time of Peyer’s arrest there was “some hint” that he was a danger to public safety, said Huffman. But that was never proven, he added.

Earlier in the hearing, Huffman had pointed out that Peyer did not have a criminal record and had made all court appearances. He also praised his “exemplary record” during a 13-year CHP career, before he was fired in May.

“One circumstance that has changed . . . from March of last year: We have been through a trial and (Peyer has) had the opportunity to show regularity of appearance,” Huffman said. “ . . .Based upon that and what’s been presented to me, I will reduce bail to $250,000 on a surety bond.”

Property Bond Denied

Grimes failed to persuade Huffman to release Peyer on a $200,000 property bond. A property bond would benefit Peyer because the four properties used to secure the $1-million surety bond would be transferred to the court and he would not have to pay an additional premium.

According to Power, the four properties and their estimated value are:

- Peyer’s Poway home, which was appraised at $195,000, with a $100,000 mortgage.

- Peyer’s parents’ home in Serra Mesa, which was appraised at $156,000 and has encumbrances totaling $22,000.

- Peyer’s in-laws’ house in Orange, which was appraised at $158,000 and has $27,000 in encumbrances.

- His sister’s-in-law Fountain Valley home, which was appraised at $144,000, with encumbrances totaling $28,350.

Huffman warned Grimes that his $200,000 bail request was too low “based on the seriousness of the offense” and said that he needed more documentation for the appraisals quoted by Power.

Grimes then asked him to lower the bail to a $250,000 surety bond and Huffman agreed.