|
Eric Olsen
Witness for the People: Guilt Phase June 29, 2004
Direct Examination by David Harris D. HARRIS: Mr. Olsen, I want to direct your attention back to 2002, and ask if you became familiar with a company by the name of Trade Corp? OLSEN: Yes. D. HARRIS: And what is Trade Corp? OLSEN: It's a specialized fertilizer company. D. HARRIS: And how is it that you became familiar with Trade Corp? OLSEN: I was hired by Scott Peterson as a territory sales rep. D. HARRIS: The person that we're referring to as Scott Peterson, that's the gentleman here in court? OLSEN: Yes. D. HARRIS: And when was it that he hired you for Trade Corp? OLSEN: Approximately end of June, beginning of July, 2002. D. HARRIS: Now, during that time period, let's just go back through this. End of June, beginning of July, was he recruiting for a position? OLSEN: Yes, he was. D. HARRIS: And did you find out about this through some particular means? OLSEN: Yes. There was an ad in a trade publication put out, and I responded to it. D. HARRIS: After that, did you interview or meet with the defendant? OLSEN: Yes. D. HARRIS: Go through the standard kind of interview process? OLSEN: Yes. D. HARRIS: I'm assuming you were successful since you got hired. OLSEN: Yes. D. HARRIS: What became your particular assignment or capacity or duties with Trade Corp at that time? OLSEN: I was territory sales rep for Southern California, Arizona, Nevada. D. HARRIS: Can you explain to us what that means? OLSEN: Yes. I went to distributors and dealers of agricultural chemicals and promoted Trade Corp's products, which were minor nutrients to be applied to agricultural crops. D. HARRIS: Just kind of sum that up, these were like fertilizer products? OLSEN: Yes, they were. D. HARRIS: When you started to work for Trade Corp, where was it based? OLSEN: Trade Corp USA was based in Modesto. D. HARRIS: You are saying Trade Corp USA. Is Trade Corp, did it have a parent company someplace else? OLSEN: Yes. It was an international company based in Spain. D. HARRIS: Then you said there was Trade Corp USA, that was based in Modesto? OLSEN: Yes, that's correct. D. HARRIS: When you got hired, who was primarily the only person for Trade Corp USA? OLSEN: Scott Peterson. D. HARRIS: The defendant? OLSEN: Yes. D. HARRIS: You get hired, and you get this particular regional sales kind of thing. How many employees were there for Trade Corp at that point in time? OLSEN: Myself. D. HARRIS: So you became like the first employee? OLSEN: Yes. D. HARRIS: Was the defendant's position, he was somewhat of a the manager of Trade Corp? OLSEN: Yes. D. HARRIS: What was it, that you recall from when you started, what were his duties? OLSEN: He was, he was manager of Trade Corp USA, the whole United States. And when I was hired, we made a determination to focus on specific areas. And I was given my territory, and Scott was going to oversee the rest of the United States and do the managerial duties of everything else. D. HARRIS: Just so we all understand this process, you are saying Trade Corp USA was based in Modesto. Was there some type of business location in Modesto? OLSEN: Yes. D. HARRIS: And do you remember where that was? OLSEN: Address-wise? D. HARRIS: If you remember. OLSEN: I don't know the street it was on. D. HARRIS: If I were to say it was Emerald, would that sound about right? OLSEN: Yes, that's correct. D. HARRIS: Was this a house, a skyscraper, or a warehouse? OLSEN: No, it was an industrial complex type of building with multiple units, and Trade Corp being in one of them. D. HARRIS: When you say multiple units, OLSEN: There were other companies in the same group of buildings. D. HARRIS: Okay. Now, these, this particular building that it was in, was it somewhat of a warehouse facility? OLSEN: Yes, it was a warehouse, and there was a small office of Scott's. D. HARRIS: Again, so the jury gets the picture of this, if you were standing outside and you are facing this, you would have like a big roll up door for the warehouse area, and for lack of a better term, kind of people door where you go into the office area? OLSEN: Yes. D. HARRIS: And did you work out at the Modesto office, this building that we're talking about? OLSEN: I personally did not work out of this building. I worked out of my home. D. HARRIS: Did you ever have to come up and meet the defendant at this particular warehouse? OLSEN: Yes. D. HARRIS: And did you ever go to the warehouse to pick up product? OLSEN: I have been to the warehouse, but not to pick up product. Yes. D. HARRIS: When you were, just to, again, trying to paint this picture here as we were, as you would go up there, did you ever go into the warehouse? OLSEN: Yes. D. HARRIS: Did you ever see if this warehouse was full, or empty, or however it was? OLSEN: Yes. D. HARRIS: Did it usually have product in it? OLSEN: Yes. D. HARRIS: We're talking about product, this would be stuff the fertilizer products that you were selling to clients? OLSEN: Right, yes. It was liquid product, in five-gallon containers, on pallets, and the warehouse was full. D. HARRIS: Was full? OLSEN: Yes. D. HARRIS: Did, sometimes did you get things in bigger than these five-gallon containers? OLSEN: Yes. Once in a while we got it in 330 gallon totes. But there were a few of those. We also got truckloads of material, but that did not come directly to our warehouse. It went straight to the distributor or dealer. D. HARRIS: Now, the sales region that you had, is that the Central Valley, that's pretty much agricultural? OLSEN: Yes. D. HARRIS: And you would deal with individual businesses, and try to get them to take Trade Corp's product? OLSEN: Yes. D. HARRIS: As part of the areas of responsibility, if you needed something, you needed an order from whatever you are talking about, these five gallons, to the bigger totes, to the bladders, or whatever, who would be responsible for you maintaining these orders? OLSEN: Scott. D. HARRIS: And that continued throughout the process during the time that you were working there? OLSEN: Yes. D. HARRIS: When you first started out, did you receive training in this particular area? OLSEN: Yes. Limited training. But, yes. D. HARRIS: Let me kind of direct you a little bit. At some point in time, did you go to a conference in October? OLSEN: Yes. D. HARRIS: What type of conference was that? OLSEN: It was a CAPCA, C-A-P-C-A, conference. It's a trade organization for pest control, pest control advisers, which I am licensed by the state as a PCA. D. HARRIS: Is it just easier to use the acronym? OLSEN: Yes. D. HARRIS: You get certified by the state, or some license from the state? OLSEN: Right. D. HARRIS: And people in this particular field or industry get together at this particular conference and kind of share ideas, and it's a trade show? OLSEN: Right. That's correct. D. HARRIS: So in October of 2002, did you go to that particular conference? OLSEN: Yes. D. HARRIS: And who did you go with? OLSEN: We had a, me and Scott had a booth at the trade show. D. HARRIS: And what kind of booth was that? OLSEN: Trade Corp booth. D. HARRIS: What were you doing at the booth? OLSEN: Representing Trade Corp and their products. D. HARRIS: Now, I don't mean to make this sound like a dumb question. I'm assuming you are not passing out samples of fertilizer at this booth, are you? OLSEN: No. Mainly brochures and speaking with other PCA's that would recommend this to use on the fields that they take care of. D. HARRIS: Did you know, since you are saying that you were licensed, did you know people in that field by that time in October? OLSEN: Yes. D. HARRIS: Did you know an individual by the name of David Fernandez? OLSEN: Yes. D. HARRIS: Did you run into him at the conference? OLSEN: Yes. D. HARRIS: Did you also meet a person by the name of Shawn Sibley? OLSEN: Yes. D. HARRIS: At some point in time at this at this conference, the trade show part of it or the booth part end, kind of, at the end of the day do you end up meeting with any of those individuals that we just talked about? OLSEN: Yes. D. HARRIS: Can you tell us about that? OLSEN: Yes. The trade show was over for the day, and they had an after, they had a Monday night gathering. And myself, Scott, Shawn, and David Fernandez met up and went to dinner. This was taking place at Disneyland. And we went to dinner. D. HARRIS: When you say it's taking place at Disneyland, was it actually in the amusement park part of Disneyland? OLSEN: No, it was in the conference portion of Disneyland Hotel. D. HARRIS: You say you went to dinner, let's go back through that. You and the defendant go to dinner? OLSEN: Myself, Scott, David Fernandez, and Shawn. D. HARRIS: At the time that you are having this particular dinner, Shawn Sibley is there, David Fernandez is there, the defendant is there. Were you aware the defendant was married, or not? OLSEN: Yes, I was. D. HARRIS: And did you, was he married at that time? OLSEN: Yes, he was. D. HARRIS: Had you met his wife, Laci Peterson? OLSEN: No. D. HARRIS: Did you know if she was pregnant? OLSEN: Yes, I did. D. HARRIS: Was she pregnant at that time in October? OLSEN: Yes. D. HARRIS: So he's married, has a pregnant wife. What happens during the dinner with the four of you? OLSEN: Scott and Shawn had a conversation that I believe was somewhat inappropriate for a married man, engaged female. And I was somewhat comfortable with the situation. I ate dinner and left. D. HARRIS: Go back through that. You said engaged female. Was Shawn Sibley engaged at that time? OLSEN: Yes, she was. D. HARRIS: Had you been told this, or found that out some point in time? OLSEN: Yes. The, the conversation, during the conversation it was brought up many times she was engaged to her fiancé, and that was quite clear. D. HARRIS: You said that there was a conversation that was taking place. Was this between the defendant and Miss Sibley? OLSEN: Yes. D. HARRIS: You said it was inappropriate. Can you tell us what you mean by that? OLSEN: Just the, basically sexual things that were said and discussed about the both of them. I mean, do you want me to -- D. HARRIS: If you remember what they actual, what the actual quotes were, please go ahead. OLSEN: I don't have actual quotes. I can tell you that it was, you know, D. HARRIS: Was the defendant saying something to Shawn Sibley? OLSEN: Yes. D. HARRIS: What was he saying? OLSEN: Mainly about sexual positions and that sort of, along those lines of sexual positions, and what she liked, and what he liked, that sort of thing. D. HARRIS: During the time that this conversation, or let me back up. Did you know if the defendant knew Shawn Sibley prior to this particular dinner? OLSEN: They did not know each other before this evening, this dinner. D. HARRIS: In fact, were they introduced together that night? OLSEN: That evening, yes, prior to dinner. D. HARRIS: You told us that you ate your dinner and you left? OLSEN: Yes. D. HARRIS: Moving forward in time a little bit. Did you hear from Shawn Sibley again? OLSEN: Yes, I did. D. HARRIS: Directing your attention to around December 2nd, 2002, beginning of December, did you get a phone call from Shawn Sibley? OLSEN: Yes, I did. D. HARRIS: And what, was Shawn Sibley asking you something? OLSEN: Yes. She wanted to know from me if Scott was married. And at that point I really as an employee of Scott's, didn't feel that I wanted to be drug into the situation that was going on, which I wasn't sure, because Shawn had stated that she would like to set up Scott with one of her friends. And I told Shawn that she needs to speak with Scott about this, that I wasn't going to get in the middle of his personal life. D. HARRIS: You made this statement about Shawn had said she wanted to set up Scott with one of her friends. Was that during the phone call where she called you the beginning of December, or was that during the dinner that happened back in October? OLSEN: That was the phone call in the early part of December. D. HARRIS: And when you were having this discussion with her, and she's asking you if he's married, is that what you are talking about when you are saying you didn't want to be involved? OLSEN: Yes. D. HARRIS: Did you tell her that? OLSEN: Yes. D. HARRIS: Moving forward in time again. Did you continue working for Trade Corp? OLSEN: No. I resigned on the 26th of December. D. HARRIS: And was there a reason that you resigned? OLSEN: Yes. I was offered another job about Thanksgiving, late November, and I went back and forth of what I should do. And I made up my mind that it just, I gave my resignation on the 26th. I called my current employer and told them on the 23rd that I was going to go to work for them, but I didn't want to resign right before Christmas. So I waited. And unfortunately it was right then. D. HARRIS: Now, at some point in time the police talked to you? OLSEN: Yes. D. HARRIS: And in the police report it said something about promises being made, just not coming through? OLSEN: Right. D. HARRIS: You took another job. But were you looking for that job? OLSEN: I wasn't looking for that job. I saw that there were things that were promised to me when I was hired on, as far as training, and as far as benefits that never came through. Health insurance, and what have you, that never developed. And that was one of my reasons for leaving, for taking my current position. D. HARRIS: Was there another reason as well? OLSEN: That was benefits. And that was the main, those were the, a lot of things were starting to not get taken care of. At about that same time, into Thanksgiving, beginning of December, that it was becoming harder and harder for things to get done. It was an uphill battle. D. HARRIS: Let me ask you that, around, what do you mean by that, around Thanksgiving? OLSEN: Things I felt weren't getting done as, on time, or as far as company product coming. And it just, things weren't taken care of in a business standpoint, starting in beginning of December, and it was frustrating for me. D. HARRIS: We were talking about things weren't getting done, product wasn't coming in. Whose responsibility is it for the things that you are talking about that wasn't happening? OLSEN: That would be Scott. D. HARRIS: So Thanksgiving, beginning of December, Scott wasn't doing what he was supposed to with the business? OLSEN: Yes. <recess> D. HARRIS: Mr. Olsen, you told us about when you had resigned from Trade Corp, and you didn't want to do it right before Christmas. When you did resign on the 26th, how did you go about doing that? OLSEN: I sent Scott an e-mail. D. HARRIS: Did Scott have, the defendant have a particular e-mail account that he did business on? OLSEN: Yes. D. HARRIS: Do you remember what that address was? OLSEN: No, I do not. D. HARRIS: Was it like a SLP, if I were to say it? OLSEN: Yes. It was initials. Scott L., yes. SLP. I can't recall. D. HARRIS: The computer that you sent it to, that was his e-mail, or his computer, that you were sending it to? OLSEN: Yes. D. HARRIS: Basically announce that you were resigning on the 26th? OLSEN: Yes. D. HARRIS: Prior to the 26th, had you been up into Modesto within just a few days or week before that? OLSEN: Yes. On the 20th of December, myself and another employee that we just hired on, Rob Weaver, had a meeting with a distributor in Stockton, and we picked up Scott and went to the meeting. D. HARRIS: Let me go through this. Rob Weaver, that's the new employee? OLSEN: Yes. We hired Rob about middle of November. November, mid November. D. HARRIS: What was Mr. Weaver's position? OLSEN: He was brought in to cover the Coast, and to help with the balance of helping Scott on the Mid Valley and the Coastal area. San Joaquin and Coastal in sales of Trade Corp products. D. HARRIS: You say you and Mr. Weaver went to some location? OLSEN: Yes, we drove, myself and Rob drove from Fresno to the Trade Corp warehouse in Modesto. Then we picked Scott up and proceeded to go to a distributor dealer, in Stockton. D. HARRIS: What time did you get to the warehouse in Modesto? OLSEN: Shortly after 7:00. D. HARRIS: Morning or evening? OLSEN: Seven in the morning. D. HARRIS: So you arrived there. Did you actually get out of your vehicles? OLSEN: Yes. We went into the office, and we talked with Scott maybe ten, fifteen minutes, and went from there. D. HARRIS: You say you go into the office. That's the little office we're talking about? OLSEN: Yes. The little, Scott's office. D. HARRIS: Did you go into the warehouse area? OLSEN: No, I did not. D. HARRIS: Any reason why? OLSEN: Not in particular. It was early in the morning, and we were supposed to go to the meeting. And the door was closed to the warehouse. And the other door from the office to the warehouse part was closed. And I just didn't feel I needed to go in there for any reason. D. HARRIS: When you were there on the 20th, did you happen to notice if there was a boat in the warehouse? OLSEN: No, I did not notice if there was a boat. D. HARRIS: Had Scott Peterson mentioned to you that he had a boat in the warehouse? OLSEN: No, he did not. D. HARRIS: Did Scott Peterson, the defendant, ever tell you that he went fishing? JUDGE: At any time? D. HARRIS: At any time. D. HARRIS: Did he ever tell you that he went fishing? OLSEN: No. D. HARRIS: Now, the business that you were doing of selling fertilizer, is there a lot of machinery involved? OLSEN: No. D. HARRIS: Do you go out and work on farm equipment? OLSEN: No, not any farming equipment. The only equipment that we had was a pump to transfer the liquid fertilizer from one tank to another. That's the only equipment. Which would be a ten horsepower engine with a transfer pump. D. HARRIS: A transfer pump. That's something that has a hose that goes into the one tank? OLSEN: Yes. D. HARRIS: Then a hose out of the pump to the other tank? OLSEN: Yes. D. HARRIS: And those worked like a regular garden hose, where you just screw them together? OLSEN: Yes. D. HARRIS: Did you have to do any mechanics on that to make it work? OLSEN: No. D. HARRIS: Did you ever happen to notice if there was any concrete in the shop? OLSEN: On one prior visit to the shop, to the warehouse, I did notice that there was a partial bag of concrete in the warehouse, yes. D. HARRIS: Where in the warehouse? OLSEN: It would be towards the front side, or the rollup door side of the warehouse. It was towards the roll up door, and narrower section of the warehouse. If you, if you walked in, on the roll up doors, on the side of the warehouse, not in the back. D. HARRIS: After you had sent this e-mail to the defendant indicating that you were resigning on the 26th, did he contact you? OLSEN: Yes. D. HARRIS: When was the first time that he contacted you? OLSEN: It was approximately, it was approximately four days afterwards, yes. Approximately four days after. D. HARRIS: Prior to contacting you, had he left messages for you? OLSEN: I do not believe so. D. HARRIS: Do you remember when you talked to the police department, talking with them about him leaving a phone message for you on December 26th? OLSEN: You would have to refresh my memory. D. HARRIS: Do you remember after that particular conversation that he had left another message? GERAGOS: Be an objection, leading. If he wants to refresh his recollection, he can show him. JUDGE: He is about to do that. D. HARRIS: Do you recall a second message where he asked you for your sales contacts for you to write a report? OLSEN: Yes. We discussed, I recall Scott calling me, and we kind of, I told him, you know, that because of the situation, that I could stay around for however long he needs me to be there because of the situation, and I would stay around. And my current employer, you know, wanted, felt, said it would be okay if I stayed on with Trade Corp for another couple of weeks until things got cleared up. And so that was, myself and Scott discussed that shortly after I resigned. And that may be the conversation you are referring to. D. HARRIS: Let me show you a report by the police. I'll show you the highlighted portions, just have you read this to yourself. GERAGOS: Bates number stamp? D. HARRIS: It would be Bates stamp 1074. GERAGOS: Thank you. D. HARRIS: The highlighted orange portions there. OLSEN: Okay, yes. JUDGE: Well, hold on a second. Does that refresh your memory? OLSEN: Yes. JUDGE: Go ahead. OLSEN: Yes. Shortly after I resigned, I was out of town, and he left a message on my phone and wanted to talk to me about the contacts, my contacts of distributing dealers that I had been dealing with. And he would like me to write up a report as to the leads and the contacts, and what materials they were interested in, what the opportunities were for sales. D. HARRIS: Now that you have had a chance to look at that report, let me go back and ask you that question. You resigned on the 26th by sending the e-mail. Do you remember now when it was that Scott Peterson called you for the first time? OLSEN: Yes. It was the 27th. D. HARRIS: And when he called you on the 27th, did he leave a message for you? OLSEN: Yes, he did. D. HARRIS: And that was the message you were just describing? OLSEN: Yes. D. HARRIS: Did he mention anywhere at all during that message that his wife was missing? OLSEN: In that message, no. D. HARRIS: Did you later talk to them at some point in time, in person, at any time in person? OLSEN: Yes. D. HARRIS: In fact, moving forward in time a little bit, did you get the information for him that he was asking for on the 27th? OLSEN: No. D. HARRIS: Were you, after you left, did you have some Trade Corp property that you had to return? OLSEN: Yes, I did. D. HARRIS: What property was that? OLSEN: Fax machines, scanner, brochures, pamphlets, label books, general office supplies. D. HARRIS: And how did you arrange to get that stuff back to Mr. Peterson? OLSEN: Myself, Scott Peterson and Rob Weaver met in Fresno shortly after the first of the year, and we went over the contacts that he requested, and business cards. And I gave him, I gave Rob, I believe, some of the office supplies, and fax machine, the scanner, and, yes. D. HARRIS: And this was done down in Fresno? OLSEN: Yes, it was. D. HARRIS: During this conversation when you met in person down in Fresno, did the defendant talk to you about his wife being missing? OLSEN: Not in depth or in great detail. He just, after our business that we talked about, Rob did ask Scott about -- GERAGOS: Objection. Hearsay. JUDGE: This is in his response. Overruled. In his presence. He asked the client a question. He responded in his presence. Overruled. GERAGOS: He said what Weaver asked, the response was? JUDGE: Yes. GERAGOS: Then I withdraw. JUDGE: Okay. That's the question right now? D. HARRIS: Yes. JUDGE: Mr. Weaver asked the defendant a question, and then he responded. Can you relay that conversation? OLSEN: At the end of business portion of our meeting, Rob asked how were things going, and with the police and the detective, and the finding Laci. And Scott went on to talk about he was interviewed by Geraldo. And that was, that was all that was said. He made, D. HARRIS: Let me just, when he was mentioning that particular statement about Geraldo, you are saying it was the defendant that was saying this to both you and in Weaver? OLSEN: Yes. D. HARRIS: And did he tell you if this was an on-the-air or over-the-air kind of interview? OLSEN: I believe it was on-the-air interview. D. HARRIS: With Geraldo Rivera? D. HARRIS: People have no other questions.
Cross Examination by Pat Harris P. HARRIS: Yes. Good afternoon, Mr. Olsen. You mentioned going to the warehouse and seeing a bag of cement. Do you recall telling the police that it was actually, it was a half-used bag of cement? OLSEN: It was a partial bag. P. HARRIS: Partial bag. It was partially, it was open, and it was partially used; is that correct? OLSEN: Yes, that's correct. P. HARRIS: And you were in the warehouse at that point; is that correct? OLSEN: At what point? P. HARRIS: You were in the warehouse when you saw the bag of cement? OLSEN: Yes. P. HARRIS: You were not in the office part, were you. OLSEN: No. P. HARRIS: The warehouse, this was an opportunity where you were actually in the warehouse. Did you see a boat there? OLSEN: No, I did not. P. HARRIS: So you were there before there was any boat parked in that warehouse? OLSEN: On my first visit to the warehouse, before, it was middle to the end of November is when I saw the partial bag of concrete, not on December 20th when we went to the meeting. P. HARRIS: Right. In fact, you testified, I believe you actually told the police officer that you were there, the first visit, you were there around the end of November or early December; is that right? OLSEN: That is correct. P. HARRIS: When you told the police officer that that's when you said you were actually in the warehouse and saw the half used bag of cement, correct? OLSEN: Partial bag, yes. P. HARRIS: Partial bag. In fact, what you told the police officer was the partial bag of cement was next to a flatbed trailer, wasn't it? OLSEN: Yes. P. HARRIS: I want you to take a look at a picture. This icepick, if you are on search warrant 12-27-02, do you recognize that is a flatbed trailer? OLSEN: Yes. P. HARRIS: And you notice there are numerous, all over it, cement patches that look like they are dry, don't they? OLSEN: Yes. P. HARRIS: In fact, several old, if you look again, several older, worn-in cement patches, like somebody has doing cement work on the flatbed trailer? OLSEN: Yes. P. HARRIS: Okay. Like to show the jury. JUDGE: Has that been marked, Mr. Harris? P. HARRIS: It's about to be. P. HARRIS: And the partial bag of cement indicated to you that someone had most likely using cement prior to November, prior to the November date that you were there; is that correct? Is that correct? D. HARRIS: Objection. Speculation. JUDGE: He can answer that. OLSEN: The question? P. HARRIS: Fact that it was a partial bag indicated to you that somebody had been using cement in that warehouse prior to your visit at the end of November, correct? OLSEN: No, not necessarily. P. HARRIS: You just thought it was a partial bag of cement sitting there? JUDGE: That's TT. Photograph of Trailer Marked as Exhibit TT for identification. JUDGE: That's a photo of what? P. HARRIS: It's a photo of a flatbed trailer. JUDGE: Flatbed trailer. P. HARRIS: Then on 12-27, JUDGE: Okay. P. HARRIS: Mr. Olsen, if you, Mr. Olsen, we could talk about your employment a little bit. Before you came to work for Trade Corp, where were you employed? OLSEN: Britz Fertilizer Incorporated. B-r-i-t-z. P. HARRIS: Britz Fertilizer. Could you just tell me, is it a large company? OLSEN: Somewhat, yes. P. HARRIS: Employs several hundred people? OLSEN: Yes. P. HARRIS: Is it a national company? OLSEN: No. D. HARRIS: Objection. Relevance. JUDGE: What's the relevance? P. HARRIS: We're discussing somebody who is supposedly, the prosecution is introducing as being a disgruntled employee. He went back to work for this company. And I will get into the questioning, we will see why. D. HARRIS: Where is that in the testimony? JUDGE: I don't know. That's his offer of proof, apparently. When you resigned from Trade Corp, did you go back to work for Britz? OLSEN: I went to work for Sun West. JUDGE: Sun West. P. HARRIS: You did not go back to work for Britz Fertilizer Incorporated? I apologize then. My understanding you went back to work, to work for Sun West? OLSEN: Yes. P. HARRIS: Is that a large corporation? OLSEN: Somewhat, yes. P. HARRIS: How many employees does that have? OLSEN: A thousand. P. HARRIS: When you were at Britz, you were salesman, correct? OLSEN: Yes. P. HARRIS: When you were at Trade Corp, were you a salesman? OLSEN: Yes. P. HARRIS: Is that correct? Are you a salesman at Sun West? OLSEN: No. P. HARRIS: Okay. In fact, you didn't like much being a salesman, did you? OLSEN: Yes. P. HARRIS: You did like being a salesman? OLSEN: Yes. P. HARRIS: So when you are at Sun West now, you are in your new job, you aren't involved in sales at all? OLSEN: No. P. HARRIS: You didn't, at no time, no point did you tell Scott that the reason you were leaving is because you really didn't prefer being a salesman, you would rather be out of the sales business? OLSEN: I don't recall. P. HARRIS: You don't recall telling him that? Okay. You testified that around the end of November, if I got my dates right, around November is when you got this offer from Sun West? OLSEN: Yes. P. HARRIS: And at that point, between then, and I think you told Mr. Harris for a couple weeks things were a little upsetting around the company, a little disorganized, something along those lines? OLSEN: Yes. P. HARRIS: And then, in essence, you wanted, or you felt like that, at that point, things weren't getting done that needed to get done; is that correct? OLSEN: Yes. P. HARRIS: Okay. And one of those complaints, the major, one of the major complaints you had was that the product was not getting shipped out of Spain where it was supposed to come from; is that correct? OLSEN: That's correct. P. HARRIS: This was an ongoing problem, was it not? OLSEN: It was getting worse. P. HARRIS: It was a problem that Scott himself was having a problem with, and had been consistently, since you began to work for Trade Corp been, consistently complained about, had been trying to fix, correct? OLSEN: According to Scott, yes. P. HARRIS: Since you had been working there, according to Scott that had been an ongoing problem hadn't it? OLSEN: No. P. HARRIS: That he was working on it? He was working on it? OLSEN: Yes. P. HARRIS: Correct. And he told you, in fact, throughout the time you were there, that he was working on this problem? OLSEN: Right. P. HARRIS: The entire time? OLSEN: That's correct. P. HARRIS: And when you say it was getting worst during that period, it was not his responsibility in terms of getting the product there. He was actually physically trying to get the product there? It wasn't due to his negligence, was it? D. HARRIS: Objection, compound and, P. HARRIS: I will restate it. P. HARRIS: It was not due to his negligence that that product wasn't coming in, was it? OLSEN: I don't know. All I know it never got there. I was his employee, and it never showed up. And that's all I was concerned about. Now, whether it was his fault or somebody in Spain, I don't know. P. HARRIS: You didn't know whose fault it was, did you? OLSEN: Well, he was the manager. P. HARRIS: And he had told you he had been repeatedly trying to get this, and this was an ongoing problem and, therefore, he was doing everything he could; but, as the manager, you felt like it was his responsibility, correct? D. HARRIS: Objection. Argumentative. Compound. JUDGE: Sustained. P. HARRIS: When you were hired, you knew, Scott gave you some background on Trade Corp, didn't he? OLSEN: Yes. P. HARRIS: He told you that essentially Trade Corp was more or less a startup company in the United States? OLSEN: Yes. P. HARRIS: And that like all startup companies, it was starting from the ground up, there are going to be problems, correct? OLSEN: That's correct. P. HARRIS: And you knew that, in fact, compared to where you were coming from, which was Britz, a large fertilizer company, you were now coming to a company where there was only one other employee; is that right? OLSEN: That's correct. P. HARRIS: And when you took the job, you were aware that there were obviously going to be startup type problems with the business, correct? OLSEN: Some, yes. P. HARRIS: And when you actually left the company, you chose to go back to another large company; is that correct? OLSEN: I mean define large. P. HARRIS: I believe you said the company you are with now has over several hundred employees? OLSEN: Okay, yes. P. HARRIS: Despite these problems, was it your testimony that you received the offer on November 26th, you did not make a decision for almost thirty days to leave Trade Corp? OLSEN: That's correct. P. HARRIS: So you had to think long and hard about whether you actually wanted to leave this company. OLSEN: No. I was holding out hope that Scott would come through on medical benefits. And I was giving him a chance to get things straightened out. And Christmas was coming, and nothing was getting, it didn't happen. P. HARRIS: He talked to you at one point about the first of the year, because there was an HMO issue of the health insurance policy versus getting started the first of the year. Do you remember that conversation? OLSEN: Not at all. P. HARRIS: Now, you mentioned that Scott never talked to you about fishing. Was that your testimony? OLSEN: Yes. P. HARRIS: Did you ever invite him to go fishing? OLSEN: No. P. HARRIS: Did you ever talk to him about it? OLSEN: No. P. HARRIS: You never brought it up? OLSEN: No. P. HARRIS: The trade show that you discussed in your testimony, where was that show trade show located? What city? OLSEN: Anaheim. P. HARRIS: It was not in Fresno? OLSEN: No. P. HARRIS: So if Detective Brocchini wrote it was in Fresno, that would be incorrect, right? D. HARRIS: Objection. Relevance and speculation. JUDGE: Sustained. P. HARRIS: I'll have you take a look at a report, Bates number 1064, interview you had with Detective Brocchini. And if you would take a look at the line, sorry, line right there, or you can read it. Having reviewed the report, are you telling Detective Brocchini that the trade show was in Fresno? OLSEN: No. P. HARRIS: And, in fact, it wasn't. It was in Anaheim; is that correct? OLSEN: Yes. P. HARRIS: At this convention, I believe Mr. Harris asked you about a David Fernandez. Was that a friend of yours, or somebody that you had worked with previously? OLSEN: Both. P. HARRIS: Both. Did Mr. Fernandez work at Britz? OLSEN: Yes. P. HARRIS: Britz. I'm sorry. And at the point of the trade show, I assumed you bumped into him. Did you know he was going to be there? OLSEN: I knew he was going to be there. P. HARRIS: Okay. At some point did he sit down and tell you that he had a girl he want you to meet that night? OLSEN: Yes. P. HARRIS: And did he tell you the girl's name was Shawn Sibley? OLSEN: I did not know who it was. P. HARRIS: He didn't give you the girl's name? OLSEN: I don't believe so. P. HARRIS: But he said he had a single girl that he wanted you to meet? OLSEN: Yes. P. HARRIS: So did he invite you to dinner that night, or did, did he invite you to dinner that night? OLSEN: No. P. HARRIS: How did the arrangements go? Did you just meet up with her and Scott? JUDGE: Give him some water. OLSEN: We just met up. P. HARRIS: So Mr. Fernandez did not introduce you to her specifically? OLSEN: No. It was in a group setting. P. HARRIS: I'm sorry? OLSEN: It was in a group setting. P. HARRIS: Okay. Thank you. And you were at dinner, if I have my facts straight, you were at dinner with Mr. Fernandez, Scott, Miss Sibley, and yourself, four of you? OLSEN: Yes, that's correct. P. HARRIS: And is it your testimony that during dinner, strike that. Is it my understanding from your testimony that these, at dinner, the four of you sitting at this salesman's convention, having drinks and eating dinner, discussed sex? OLSEN: Yes. P. HARRIS: And this seemed unusual and out of place to you? OLSEN: Yes. P. HARRIS: Okay. OLSEN: Between a married man and an engaged woman, yes. P. HARRIS: And when you testified, you said it was a conversation between Scott and Shawn, back and forth, discussing, OLSEN: Yes. P. HARRIS: sex? So Miss Sibley was participating with Mr. Peterson, true? OLSEN: Yes. P. HARRIS: Miss Sibley actually works for a company, rephrase the question. She is with a company where Scott was actually trying to get, or Scott was looking to get, do business with the company; is that true? OLSEN: That night we had just met her. I was not aware of any business arrangements being made, or having been made. P. HARRIS: You later learned, in fact, Miss Sibley a works with a company where fertilizer gets researched? OLSEN: Yes. P. HARRIS: And that, in fact, Scott had asked her, someone of her company to have Scott's fertilizer researched, correct? OLSEN: I was not made aware of that. P. HARRIS: Okay. You testified with Mr. Harris that you were aware that, in fact, Scott was married, correct? OLSEN: Yes. P. HARRIS: And you were, in fact, aware that his wife was pregnant; is that true? OLSEN: Yes. P. HARRIS: And, in fact, you told the police officers that it was your observations that Scott seemed happy about the pregnancy? OLSEN: Seemed happy? Yes. P. HARRIS: You told police officers that, based on your working with him, you are talking to him, your experiences with him, that Scott seemed happy with the pregnancy? OLSEN: Yes. P. HARRIS: Shortly after you came to work for Trade Corp, you became aware that Trade Corp was, in fact, looking to move the location of the warehouse in Modesto to a place called American Warehouse? OLSEN: Yes. P. HARRIS: And you became aware of that in October of 2002, did you not? OLSEN: Yes. P. HARRIS: And it was Trade Corp's desire to move the warehouse to a bigger location, correct? OLSEN: Yes. P. HARRIS: One thing I forgot, I'm sorry, about the convention. The next day at the convention, you and Scott had a booth at the, when I say the next day, the day after you went out to dinner with Shawn, David Fernandez, and Scott, the next day you had a booth? OLSEN: We had a booth for three days. P. HARRIS: Specifically the day after one of those three days was, day after the dinner? OLSEN: Yes. P. HARRIS: Do you recall Shawn Sibley coming to the booth that day? OLSEN: Yes. P. HARRIS: Do you recall Shawn Sibley specifically coming to the booth and trying to give Scott Peterson Amber Frey's phone number? OLSEN: Repeat the question. P. HARRIS: Do you recall Shawn Sibley coming to that booth and actively trying to give Scott a phone number to an Amber Frey? OLSEN: No. P. HARRIS: You don't have any recollection of that? OLSEN: No. P. HARRIS: Do you recall her coming to the booth? OLSEN: Shawn? P. HARRIS: Yes. OLSEN: Yes. P. HARRIS: Okay. Did you leave at that point? OLSEN: I don't recall. P. HARRIS: You have no memory of that? OLSEN: Of what? P. HARRIS: Of whether or not you left at that point. OLSEN: No. P. HARRIS: The period after the 26th of December, you resigned essentially on December 26th; is that my understanding? OLSEN: Yes. P. HARRIS: The next time you physically saw Scott Peterson was at a meeting on January 5th? OLSEN: Yes. P. HARRIS: That was at a restaurant? OLSEN: Yes. P. HARRIS: And at that meeting, you had a cell phone that belonged to Trade Corp? OLSEN: Yes. P. HARRIS: And at that meeting, you asked Scott, even though you had resigned, if you could keep the cell phone for a while? OLSEN: No. It was, I didn't ask him, but it was, he let me keep it, because I still was helping Rob in his, in the transition. P. HARRIS: Right. OLSEN: So, yes, I did keep the cell phone for several more weeks, Trade Corp's phone, after that meeting. P. HARRIS: And as part of helping that transition, being involved in that transition, that went on for a couple or three weeks after you left the company, right? OLSEN: Yes. P. HARRIS: And during that entire period, both before that meeting on the 5th, and the two or three weeks after the 5th, you were keeping in contact somewhat with Rob Weaver, and to lesser degree with Scott Peterson? OLSEN: Yes. P. HARRIS: And part of the reason you were keeping in contact was because you had expenses, paychecks, things like that, that were owed you? OLSEN: The reason why I was helping Rob to get the contacts, and get everything in transition, and along with everything else that, I mean it was tie up the loose ends; and, yes, it was money owed to me. But that wasn't the reason why I still had the cell phone. P. HARRIS: Okay. I'm sorry if I'm misstated that, or led you to believe that was my questioning. What I mean to get at is, you stayed in contact throughout the January period in order to help with the transition? OLSEN: That's correct. P. HARRIS: And during that period, you became aware that, in fact, the Modesto Police Department had seized the checkbooks of the company, all the company records. You became aware of that, correct? OLSEN: Yes. P. HARRIS: You became aware, in addition to the pressures on Mr. Peterson, he could not write paychecks to the employees, such as yourself? OLSEN: Yes. P. HARRIS: Could not pay expenses to people such as yourself? OLSEN: Yes. P. HARRIS: Then, that he, in fact, was in a situation where his entire company was going down the tubes because the Modesto Police Department would not turn over his checkbook? D. HARRIS: Objection. Calls for speculation. P. HARRIS: You are aware of that? JUDGE: Sustained. D. HARRIS: Objection. JUDGE: Sustained. P. HARRIS: You are aware, in fact, it was a problem getting ahold of checks and expenses from Trade Corp at that point, correct? OLSEN: Among other things, yes. P. HARRIS: You mentioned that at this last luncheon on the 5th that Scott did bring up his missing wife. Do you recall him bringing that up at that luncheon? OLSEN: Yes. P. HARRIS: Do you recall at the luncheon, in fact, I believe your testimony was, the only thing he mentioned was something to do with the Geraldo Rivera interview? OLSEN: Yes. P. HARRIS: Do you remember, do you, in fact, recall that at that luncheon he discussed several things about the search for Laci Peterson, including the fact that the police still suspected him? OLSEN: I cannot recall that that was, that that was discussed. P. HARRIS: Okay. Rob Weaver was present at that, OLSEN: Yes. P. HARRIS: meeting as well, was he not? Do you, in fact, recall during that meeting the conversation dealing with a Trade Corp conference that was to come up in a few weeks? OLSEN: No. P. HARRIS: Okay. You weren't aware of any Trade Corp conference that was going to occur in Mexico at the end of January? OLSEN: At that meeting? P. HARRIS: Well, let me rephrase the question. Were you ever aware of a Trade Corp conference that was going to be held at the end of January in Mexico? OLSEN: Not until later on in January. P. HARRIS: I see. So you didn't learn about it until after the luncheon on the 5th? OLSEN: That's correct. P. HARRIS: Okay. So you don't have any recollection at all at that luncheon of the, of any discussion about Scott asking to have the meeting put off? OLSEN: What meeting? P. HARRIS: The Trade Corp conference meeting. That doesn't, you don't remember that at all? OLSEN: No. P. HARRIS: During the period when you were helping the transition with Rob Weaver, did he tell you at that point that a number of Trade Corp customers would no longer meet with Scott? D. HARRIS: Objection. Hearsay. JUDGE: Sustained. P. HARRIS: Ask you to look at a report, Bates number 1113. If you would, read the paragraph starting on Monday 1-6-2003. Did you have a chance to read it? OLSEN: Yes. P. HARRIS: You did an interview with a Detective Al Brocchini on Monday, January 6th, correct? OLSEN: A meeting on January 6? P. HARRIS: You mean the detective? OLSEN: No. P. HARRIS: January 6th, at 6:00 o'clock in the evening, did you receive a phone call from the detective, Al Brocchini? OLSEN: Yes. P. HARRIS: That was one day after the meeting, the luncheon you had had with Scott Peterson, correct? OLSEN: Yes. P. HARRIS: Now, having had a chance to look at a report of that meeting, OLSEN: Yes. P. HARRIS: does it refresh your recollection on what was discussed at that luncheon? OLSEN: Yes. P. HARRIS: Specifically do you now recall that Scott Peterson talked about Laci Peterson's disappearance, told you specifically that the police were still looking at him as a prime suspect. Told you that they had seized his cars, and gone into his house, seized his cars and his house, he didn't know what to do? OLSEN: Yes. P. HARRIS: You told him at that point that you were resigning from Trade Corp, and you were being allowed to keep the cell phone until you received a new cell phone from your next business; is that what you told the detective? OLSEN: Yes. P. HARRIS: You were asked earlier about a phone call you received from Shawn Sibley on December, excuse me, early part of December, in which she asked you about Scott Peterson's marital status. Do you remember that? OLSEN: Yes. P. HARRIS: Do you recall that shortly after that, you received a call from Scott Peterson, and that Scott told you, specifically referring to Shawn Sibley, I shouldn't have met her. I did something stupid. Do you recall that? OLSEN: Yes. P. HARRIS: Do you recall that this was on, this conversation occurred on December 9th? OLSEN: Yes. P. HARRIS: I don't have anything further. JUDGE: Any redirect? D. HARRIS: No. |