Scott Peterson's attorneys claim to have new evidence proving his innocence in the murders of his wife and unborn son. The Los Angeles Innocence Project filed a petition alleging the case was based on circumstantial evidence, citing investigation mismanagement, evidence destruction, and a possible link to a burglary near the couple's home.
Peterson was convicted in 2004, with prosecutors claiming he dumped his wife's body in 2002. He maintains his innocence. The petition argues that crucial evidence was withheld from the jury and seeks to vacate his sentence.
The new evidence centers on a burglary across the street from the Petersons' home. A witness allegedly overheard burglars discussing Laci seeing them, suggesting she was alive when Peterson left. Attorneys also connect the burglars to a burned-out van with bloodstains, information they claim was omitted from the trial.
The petition also challenges the timeline of events, including the established death date of the unborn child and the location where the bodies were placed in the water. The evidence, they say, points to the Albany Bulb, not Peterson's fishing spot. The petition concludes that the prosecution's theory is false.
10 Comments
BuggaBoom
Justice means ensuring the right person is punished. If Scott is innocent, then we must rectify this mistake.
Eugene Alta
I think there’s more to this story, and the petition is a valid reason to investigate further. Innocence matters!
KittyKat
Every time someone gets convicted, they claim new evidence. This is just a tactic to reduce his sentence or get released.
Noir Black
I always believed he was innocent! This new evidence sounds promising, and I hope truth prevails.
Eugene Alta
Burglars discussing a sighting? That sounds too convenient to be real. Peterson is still guilty in my eyes.
KittyKat
Circumstantial evidence can be misleading. It's great that the Innocence Project is stepping in to look deeper.
Katchuka
No amount of new evidence can change the fact that Peterson had a motive. He deserves to stay behind bars.
BuggaBoom
The timeline he proposes doesn’t even make sense. If he had nothing to hide, he wouldn’t need these convoluted arguments.
KittyKat
The details about the burglary could really change things. It's worth investigating rather than dismissing outright.
Loubianka
Look at how many wrongful convictions have been overturned by new evidence. We can’t ignore that potential!