Scott Peterson appears in court as Innocence Project seeks DNA tests in murder case

March 13, 2024

Scott Peterson


Scott Peterson appeared in court virtually on Tuesday as part of his latest attempt to obtain a new trial over the murder of his wife and unborn child, this time with the backing of the Los Angeles Innocence Project.

Previously, Peterson unsuccessfully sought a new trial based on based on allegations of misconduct committed by a juror in his 2004 murder trial. Now, with the help of the Innocence Project, he is attempting to secure evidence, including through DNA testing, that could potentially lead to a new trial.

Formerly a San Luis Obispo resident, Peterson, now 51, met his wife Laci Peterson while they both were attending Cal Poly.

In 2002, Laci Peterson, 27, was due to give birth in four weeks when she disappeared on Christmas Eve. Scott Peterson told police he had left the couple’s Modesto home that morning to go fishing in Berkeley.

Nearly four months later, Laci Peterson’s remains washed up on a rocky shore of San Francisco Bay. A passerby found them a few miles from where Scott Peterson said he had gone fishing.

In 2004, a San Mateo County jury convicted Scott Peterson of the first-degree murder of his wife and the second-degree murder of the fetus. He was sentenced to death for the murders.

In Aug. 2020, the California Supreme Court overturned Peterson’s death sentence after it determined individuals who could have served on the jury were wrongfully dismissed after they indicated objections to the death penalty. Then in Oct. 2020, the state Supreme Court ordered San Mateo County Superior Court to determine whether a juror committed prejudicial misconduct by failing to disclose her prior involvement with other legal proceedings, including being the victim of a crime.

Peterson did not receive a new trial. In Dec. 2021, a judge sentenced Peterson to life in prison without the possibility of parole for his wife’s murder, plus a concurrent sentence of 15 years to life for the second-degree murder of their unborn child.

On Tuesday, a San Mateo County judge scheduled more hearings in the case for dates in April, May and July in response to motions filed by the Innocence Project.

The Innocence Project claims there is evidence in the case surrounding a residential burglary across the street from the Petersons’ home, as well as a burnt van found near the Petersons’ home the morning after Lacey Peterson disappeared. 

A sample from a mattress in the van reportedly tested presumptive positive for blood. The Innocence Project is requesting that the court order new DNA tests in the murder case.


Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

The smug look on his face says it all.

If it’s Laci’s blood in the burnt van it’s because he couldn’t do the deed himself before transporting her body to the Berkeley marina and had hired accomplices. He’s beyond guilty, the dyed hair, cash, apprehended at the Mexican border. I used to go to The Shack and remembered them after the fact, pretty, part Hispanic-looking girl in the front, frat-boy looking guy in the back.

Child killer Scott Peterson is exhibit one on why we need to demand the death penallty for violent criminals, our California state government is coddling the worst anong us.

Have you ever met a single competent civilian government employee in your lifetime? Life and Death is a lot of power…

Your point is the basis for my objection to the death penalty. Rarely, if ever, can one be absolutely certain of someone’s conviction. Incompetence is so prevalent (possibly even universal) as to create doubt in any conviction. “Beyond reasonable doubt” is not a sufficient standard if you are going to execute someone. As long as a convict is not executed, there is some amount of money which can correct (or nearly correct) the situation. Once a convict is executed, no remediation is possible. My opinion is that we should, in fact, have the death penalty, but change the method of execution. Convicts sentenced to death should be executed by very, very long internment.

Your objection is the basis for my point. As long as jurors believe there is some amount of money which can correct (or nearly correct) an innocent person being found guilty, no murder trial will be considered fair and unbiased. I believe the ultimate penalty should be considered at all first- degree murder trials and decided by the judge as part of the sentencing not the prosecution. All jurors should be willing to stand by their verdict regardless of the punishment.

I like what the Innocence Project has done for those wrongly accused, but revisiting this case? Shameful. Michael A. has it correct.

Malignant Narcissism.