Murdered teen's father asks DA to con...

Murdered teen's father asks DA to convene grand jury in cold case

There are 19 comments on the Lebanon Daily News story from Jan 28, 2008, titled Murdered teen's father asks DA to convene grand jury in cold case. In it, Lebanon Daily News reports that:

Peggy Reber's father, Herman Reber, delivered petitions with more than 2,000 signatures to District Attorney David Arnold at the Lebanon courthouse this morning and urged Arnold to convene a grand jury in the ...

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Lebanon Daily News.

Brenda C

Philadelphia, PA

#1 Jan 29, 2008
I am totally confused as to D A Arnold's refusal to convene a grand jury for the murderer of Peggy Reber. He states 'lack of evidence'. Isn't the purpose of the grand jury to decide if there is enough evidence? googled...'The purpose of the grand jury IS TO DECIDE IF THERE IS PROBABLE CAUSE TO INDICT'. So why, oh why, Mr Arnold are you holding back and doing the job of the grand jury? Why not let them (the grand jury) do their job and decide if there's enough evidence? What are we (the people of Lebanon) supposed to think Mr Arnold? That there's a reason your not wanting to prosecute the murderer of Peggy? Well I for one, think I'll make it my business to look further into 'why'. Your 'job' is to work FOR THE PEOPLE of Lebanon County and your certainly NOT doing a very good job of it! The people want this animal to pay and your working 'against' us. What's the deal DA Arnold?

Brenda C
Truth or Dare

Sellersville, PA

#2 Jan 29, 2008
One wonders just what it is YOU know Mr. DA Arnold that you won't budge on this case.
You havent been swayed by Public outcry.you haven't been moved by a community seeking answers.You didn't show respect to the family by even making an appearance at the service ..Just what is important to you?Don't think even for one moment this community will sit back and be silent any longer.Who are you trying to protect?What secret is out there..that this case is being silenced?"You're working on the case,you say?Who is working on it?How many? Care to give us an update as to progress?Michelle Gooden is not the only person willing to dig deeper to find out.
I am OUTRAGED,earn the paycheck I am paying you!Off to work I go,so you can eat another day!
catpaw

Coatesville, PA

#3 Jan 29, 2008
I think some of you are dealing with rage, frustration and grief which clouds your thinking. Why would Arnold NOT convene a grand jury if he felt there was sufficient evidence? It doesn't make sense for him not to. Certainly there has been enough pressure placed on him. The fact that he has not succombed to all the ink and airtime and the threats to his political future, makes me think he deserves our respect.
Objectivity

Lancaster, PA

#4 Jan 29, 2008
I wonder if this lynch-mob mentality would be as popular if the object of it were a member of your family? Does the DA not have an obligation to be fair and objective in analyzing evidence? A grand jury in Pennsylvania does not exist for the purpose of handing down an indictment. Michelle Gooden and Lara Lebeau are flat wrong about the purpose of a grand jury. Why haven't you heard Lebeau ask her good friend Dierdre Eshleman why she didn't convene a grand jury if it is so appropriate? Politicizing this murder as a way to get back at Arnold is pretty sad.
JUSTICE4PEGGY

Lebanon, PA

#5 Jan 29, 2008
If you would be so kind as to explain to us what exactly the purpose of a grand jury is, I would appreciate it. Correct me if I am wrong but I thought a grand jury decides whether there is enough evidence to issue an arrest.
Dont lose Sight

Newark, DE

#6 Jan 29, 2008
People are losing their ability to think rationally. Nobody disagrees with the fact that a murderer should be able to walk free, however, think about what all this publicity is doing. Great, you go to the grand jury, they vote in favor of bringing this man (whom I might add is not a "huge" political or influencial person)to a jury, do you really think the case will be heard in Lebanon County?? I don't think so. So now we move the case elsewhere, where people aren't emotionally attached, to a jury of his peers, you are innocent until proven guilty in a court of law, right....so now we have all this circumstancial evidence, no real hard evidence,(because evidence collection back then is not what it is today and how much survived the flood of 72?), and the jury of his peers cannot find him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, now what? A Guilty man walks free, never to be retried for the same crime! Can't do it, its against the laws of our country. So people, give the DA a break, let he & his people do things the right way, not your way based on emotion. No one should be able to get away with murder and if you have it your way, the only thing that will happen is Michele Gooden gets a final chapter to her book and unfortunately, it is not the chapter we all want to see. Rest in Peace Peggy Reber, alot of people are praying for your justice, but lets make sure it is done right and for the right reasons!
Dont lose Sight

Newark, DE

#7 Jan 29, 2008
Sorry, typo on the 2nd line..a murdered SHOULDN'T be able to walk free.
Objectivity

Lebanon, PA

#8 Jan 30, 2008
Would it matter if someone educated in the law explained the process of a grand jury to you? You hear only what you want and ignore the rest. Very sad.
JUSTICE4PEGGY

Lebanon, PA

#9 Jan 30, 2008
I know the Peggy Reber case has alot of mixed emotions and peoples opinions vary. I am sure what I am about to say will sound snobby, and that isn't my intent at all. Give the DA a break? How many DA's have we had since 1968? Dave Arnold is NOT a stupid man, that is obvious, he just convicted a gentlemen in September for murder. That was taken to a grand jury. That same grand jury still exists today. If it is taken to the grand jury and they say "Nope, not enough evidence", at least he tried. Let them decide. But, to make a statement saying the person of interest is not a threat, is saying alot. It tells me they have had enough evidence to make the assumption and statement. And as for circumstancial evidence, Scott Peterson currently sits on death row. That case was based largely on circumstancial evidence. I realize things were different in 1968, and we have more advanced technology today, but maybe, just maybe some of that technology could still be used. Lets not forget, Peggy has an identical twin.
JUSTICE4PEGGY

Lebanon, PA

#10 Jan 30, 2008
Please someone explain. I am all ears. I am asking you or someone in educated in the law to explain. I don't ignore FACTS! Nowhere have I EVER seen where Michelle Gooden OR Laura LeBeau state that the grand jury hands down an indictment. I have read where they stated, it could result in an arrest. Seems to me like YOU are only hearing what YOU want to hear. And I will agree, it is sad! 40 YEARS have passed and this GIRL was swept away like her life meant NOTHING! MY mother always said, if you don't have nothing nice to say, don't say anything. She is a very wise woman!
Objectivity

Lebanon, PA

#11 Jan 30, 2008
Just ask Laura. She spoke to a previous DA (just happened to run into that person) who said that a grand jury would be perfect here. Why didn't Laura ask that "former da" why they didn't do anything in this case or convene a grand jury if it so appropriate? Only two DA's in Lebanon have ever convened a grand jury...Charles and Arnold. Any other "former DA" has no room to talk. By the way, LeBeau and Gooden have clearly won the battle as far as personal attacks. I haven't heard ONE from Arnold...not one.
JUSTICE4PEGGY

Lebanon, PA

#12 Jan 30, 2008
You are absoulutely correct, why didn't any other DA convene a grand jury? That is a good question. I am not implying Laura didn't make the statement, I haven't heard it. I think this is a very difficult case, without a doubt, and people see things differently. I don't think anybodys intentions are to battle eachother, but words sometimes get taken out of context. I certainly don't think Dave Arnold is a bad person. I don't hold a law degree and maybe I am not reading correctly what the purpose of a grand jury is. I would certainly hope we could all agree that this girl deserves justice.
Objectivity

Lebanon, PA

#13 Jan 30, 2008
Absolutely she deserves justice. However, justice means different things to different people. An effort was made to seek justice in 1970. A jury decided there was reasonable doubt. Does that mean the person tried is innocent? Is OJ innocent? The fact that this guy was found not guilty in 1970 doesn't mean he's out of the picture as far as a defense attorney pointing the finger at him, or someone else for that matter. It is pretty difficult to attack Arnold for something that happened 40 years ago. Since that time, people have had every opportunity to come forward. They never did until now. Given the lynch mob mentality associated with this cause, I hope Arnold looks closely at those who now suddenly reveal long held information that certain people want to hear to advance their cause.
"Dummest DA", "cover up" and threats to dig up skeletons in Arnold's closet are not easily taken out of context.
Michelle Gooden

Pinehurst, NC

#14 Jan 30, 2008
Rest in Peace Peggy Reber, alot of people are praying for your justice, but lets make sure it is done right and for the right reasons!- Don't lose Sight

AMEN!
catpaw

Coatesville, PA

#15 Jan 30, 2008
Isn't this getting a little too wierd?
JUSTICE4PEGGY

Lebanon, PA

#16 Feb 5, 2008
Not sure what you mean, this is getting a little too weird. There is definately something weird about a 40 year old UNSOLVED murder.
D Schaeffer

United States

#17 Feb 5, 2008
I wonder if you are trying to justify your own integrity by using the attack on Dave Arnold as your shield. Dave Arnold is asking witness to come forward if they have new and incriminatating evidence while you are asking Mr. Arnold to look closely at people who come forward after all these years. What is one to do? Maybe that's what happened 40 years ago. People did not come forward for fear of their own safety or as you put it to advance their cause. You seem certain the person tried was indeed guilty of the crime. Lebanon officals could prove this to the people of Lebanon by calling in forensic specialists to look at all the evidence and files. The forensic specialists may find one tiny piece of evidence that was not relevant in 1968, but could now be the answer to the guilt or innocence of suspects. As far as the lynch mob mentality, I do not see that happening at all. A 14 year old child was brutally murdered 40 years ago. If you can disregard that fact, sir, I feel truly sorry for you. Those other 14 year old children grew up and are now seeing 40 years ago in a different light.
As far as a cover up, I'm not so sure about that. But one thing is certain, there would be a lot of very prominent names mentioned which would cause a huge embarrassment to the City of Lebanon. And we all know why their names would be mentioned. That in itself makes me question the investigation on the case. Does Dave Arnold have the proper authority in this case, or is he just a puppet on a string? All we are asking is prove your accusations that the guilty person got away with murder and we'll accept that. But until that can be proven, we will not stop seeking justice for Peggy Lynn Reber.(Who by the way,was not a very very bad girl, if you know what I mean).
D Schaeffer
Lebanon, PA
Objectivity wrote:
Absolutely she deserves justice. However, justice means different things to different people. An effort was made to seek justice in 1970. A jury decided there was reasonable doubt. Does that mean the person tried is innocent? Is OJ innocent? The fact that this guy was found not guilty in 1970 doesn't mean he's out of the picture as far as a defense attorney pointing the finger at him, or someone else for that matter. It is pretty difficult to attack Arnold for something that happened 40 years ago. Since that time, people have had every opportunity to come forward. They never did until now. Given the lynch mob mentality associated with this cause, I hope Arnold looks closely at those who now suddenly reveal long held information that certain people want to hear to advance their cause.
"Dummest DA", "cover up" and threats to dig up skeletons in Arnold's closet are not easily taken out of context.
Michelle Gooden

Pinehurst, NC

#18 Feb 5, 2008
Justice means different things to different people? This is not a gray area. Murder is a black and white violation of the law, and a failure to deliver a conviction in the case is justice lost.

Personally, I think a parent of a murdered child just might see justice for exactly what it is, and what it's worth. John Walsh of America's Most Wanted is a prime example of that, and his child's murder is still unsolved, but NOT due to a lack of action by authorities.

"The fact that the guy was found not guilty in 1970 doesn't mean he is out of the picture as far as a defense attorney pointing a finger at him, or someone else for that matter"

I am always amazed when original investigators and the prosecutor at the time cling to Root's guilt while they all stood by quietly and failed to tell the jury EVERYTHING that was done to Peggy in the course of her murder. If they truly had a guilty man, and they truly wanted a conviction...why not tell the true nature of the attack? Juries work so much better when they are told the facts.

Those same old-timers LOVE to talk about a multiple killer theory, yet Root's trial wasn't transcribed. The preservation of expert and witness testimony would assist in prosecuting the MULTIPLE killers of Peggy's murder. Lebanon officials were content THEN to take the loss, and let it go. Well, Lebanon residents (to the tune of 2,000+ signatures) do not agree with that decision.

LET a defense attorney point at Root. The suspect Lebanon's current DA doesn't view as a threat should have EVERY benefit, and the truth will STILL convict him.

It appears Lebanon's officials want the guaranteed slam dunk win, and residents are begging them to get in the game.

Two things are a slam dunk guarantee
#1 Peggy's killer LOVES Lebanon's DA, past & present
#2 There will NEVER be justice if the DA doesn't try.

Would this be acceptable for The DA's daughter? A local judge's daughter? or a real estate attorney's daughter? NO! NO! NO!
It's not acceptable for Herman Reber's daughter either.

Lebanonians do NOT want to live next door to a child killer, who would?
Officials expect the residents of Lebanon to write checks for their property taxes, and shut up about the silly, little child killer issue.
How dumb is that!!!
Yep Yep

Crystal Lake, IL

#19 Jan 13, 2012
The purpose of A Grand Jury is not to arrest anyone who the Prosecutor or the public as a whole or a private individual suspects of commiting a crime.
The Main purpose of a grand jury is to go after ppl who commit heinous serious crimes, and to insulate the prosecutor from a civil claim against him or her. Thus, Grand Juries are something used by attorneys to seek the truth, whole not punishiung someone who may be innodent iwth the STIGMA that would result from such an unwarranted arrest.

truth be told I would be HARD pressed to find any attorney who wouldnt want to prosecute and issue an arrest warrant for anyone suspected of being a murderer. Truth be told the prosecutor decided there was no evidence for a murder arrest, you shouldnt be mad, you should try to see it from the prosecutors point of view, he can waste money on a grand jury and police investigation, and he can get his case immediately thrown out by a judge, or even worse a not guilty verdict. the Conviction rate is very important for a lawyer. if they are not 51% or even some 65-80% that they will get a conviciton then they wont do anything. they either neeed alot of evidence, or knowing the person could go for a plea. there has to be evidence for police and prosecutors to act. u gotta understand a murder trial would cost the prosecutor alot of oney to, and if the person was innocent no way or very low chance they would take a plea deal. what u would have is a long lenghty unproductive waste of money and manpower out the window with nothing to show for it. so to reitterate the Prosecutors Grand Jury is not to see if there is evidence but to try to find the truth of facts and to see if there is probable cause of wrong doing. prosectors do this by showing the grand juryy physicaly evidence or swron statements. how could a prosecutor do this through a grand jury if there was zero evidence? he couldnt.
What would he do? convene a grand jury, order wiretaps and ask police to follow this suspect and then not even get anything for it? it dont work like that. besides I have seen many of times where Lawyers lie to the press and sayi they aint going to dfo anything only to be doing it in private.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Lebanon Daily News Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Woman, 70, whacks intruder in head with sauce pan (Feb '09) 15 hr Sherwin Nelson 3
News Laboy guilty of stabbing (May '11) Aug 5 Elijah laboy 66
News Ex-city cop found dead (Feb '11) Jun '17 GHOST 636
News City woman, 62, gets probation for drug-related... (Jan '09) Jun '17 Machine1000 3
News SC priest: No communion for Obama supporters (Nov '08) Jun '17 johnharby 557
News Repeat shoplifter gets state sentence (May '10) May '17 Big bob 25
News BREAKING NEWS: Grand jury releases report on Pe... (Jul '09) Apr '17 Rachel vaughan 246
More from around the web