Scott Peterson murder case is still making news 20+ years later

It’s been more than 20 years since Scott Peterson was convicted of the murder of his wife Laci Peterson, and their unborn son, Connor. Speculation and fascination surrounding the case have barely slowed over the past two decades as people want to know if Scott didn’t do it … who did?  

Peterson is currently serving a life sentence at Mule Creek State Prison in Northern California without the possibility of parole. Though he’s maintained his innocence, his two appeals have been denied. In 2020, a California Supreme Court overturned his death sentence but upheld his conviction. However, Peterson was re-sentenced in December 2021 and subsequently denied another trial in 2022.  

Earlier this year, the Los Angeles Innocence Project took on Peterson’s case as part of their mission to “exonerate the wrongly convicted” and filed motions to seek DNA testing on post-conviction discovery.  

SCOTT PETERSON’S MOST OUTRAGEOUS DEFENSE CLAIMS, DEBUNKED

Now, in the most recent turn of events, Peterson has given his first interview since his wife’s death, as part of a three-part docu-series “Face to Face with Scott Peterson” which was recently released on Peacock. His key message to viewers – “Look at the evidence.”

Scott Peterson, convicted of the murders of his pregnant wife Laci and their unborn son Conor in 2005, appears remotely for an appeal hearing on Tuesday, March 12, 2024. Peterson’s latest attempt to overturn his conviction has attracted the support of the Los Angeles Innocence Project. Judge Elizabeth Hill, right, oversaw the proceedings. (KTVU/Pool)

Revisiting the day of Laci Peterson’s disappearance 

By now, the hours leading up to Laci Peterson’s death have been covered at length by multiple podcasters and news special reports. Reportedly, on Christmas Eve morning in 2022, Scott Peterson said he spent the morning with his wife before going fishing at Berkeley Marina.  

Upon his return home, there was no sign of Laci, though Scott initially was not concerned. It wasn’t until he had called Laci’s mother and found out she wasn’t there that he began to worry.  

As part of his docu-series interview, Peterson commented on the initial search of the home. He said an officer on the scene said “it was the husband” unaware Peterson was behind him. Peterson focuses on the officers and lead detective on the case, Al Brocchini of the Modesto Police Department, throughout the docu-series and accuses them of not looking for his wife but rather trying to uncover any evidence that would point to his possible guilt.  

Peterson points out that there is no evidence linking him to the crime, and what was presented in court was largely circumstantial. His behavior did not paint a good picture of innocence, but was it enough for him to be guilty? 

Painting an unflattering picture of Peterson 

Though not evidence, a new piece of information came to light only a few weeks after Laci’s disappearance in 2002. Amber Frey came forward to admit she had been dating Scott Peterson, unaware he had a wife or was expecting a child.  

Yet, as Peterson would argue, cheating did not make him a murderer. However, having a third party involved created a motive, and not a particularly unusual one. True crime cases have had their fair share of cheating spouses attempting to end their marriages through murder plots and extreme criminal activity rather than filing for divorce.   

Up until then, though, Laci’s body had not been found, which left it as a missing persons case. Then, in April 2003, her body washed ashore in the San Francisco Bay. In the days following, Peterson headed to San Diego to play golf with his family and was promptly arrested near the Torrey Pines Golf Course on April 18, 2003, as authorities worried he would flee to Mexico.  

On November 12, 2004, he was convicted of the murders of Laci and Connor Peterson after a five-month trial. And, in the docu-series, Peterson talks about his regrets about not testifying at his trial and mentions other leads the investigators did not follow through on.  

Scott Peterson and Laci Peterson in a still photo appearing in the forthcoming docuseries, “American Murder: Laci Peterson.” (Courtesy of Netflix)

Though, had he taken the stand, would it have swayed the jury in his favor or further cemented their idea that he was a murderer? 

CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION

Peterson points the finger  

One notable detail that’s been mentioned several times over the past two decades is at the time of Laci’s disappearance, a burglary took place across the street from their home. Peterson says he believes his wife went over there to see what was going on and was taken. 

Two people were arrested in the burglary though no evidence related to it was allowed as part of his case. Also, two neighbors came forward saying they spotted the van that was linked to the burglary. A mattress with blood was found in the back of the van, though authorities did not test for blood, and a request by the Los Angeles Innocence Project for testing was also denied. 

Earlier this year, the Los Angeles Innocence Project took on Peterson’s case as part of their mission to “exonerate the wrongly convicted” and filed motions to seek DNA testing on post-conviction discovery.  

Much of the details and theories Peterson shares in the docu-series have been covered in great length. Rabia Chaudry, an attorney, and co-host of the podcast “Rabia and Ellyn Solve the Case,” goes through the case in detail, and she contends there’s not enough evidence to point to Peterson’s guilt.  

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Chaudry is well-known for her coverage and advocacy for the innocence of her family friend Adnan Syed, another murder case that took the media by storm over 20 years ago through the popularity of the “Serial” podcast. In that case, it also involved the murder of a significant other with questionable timelines and evidence.  

However, media coverage doesn’t change the face of a conviction. That’s a fact. What remains are questions, mostly posed by Peterson himself. He can try to sway the narrative and hope for new evidence to support his stance of innocence, but even then, would it be enough to exonerate him? 

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM KELLY HYMAN