GUILTY CA - Laci Peterson, 27, pregnant, Modesto, 24 Dec 2002 #2

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

MadMcGoo

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Nov 1, 2018
Messages
10,784
Reaction score
37,278
IMG_3287.jpeg





Thread #1
 
Last edited:
Hey Everyone,
Every night on Websleuths YouTube LIve, we read the opening arguments in the Scott Peterson case. It's good to remind people of the court case against Scott Peterson. It is SOLID. We are about halfway through the opening arguments for the prosecution. We also discuss the latest in true crime so I'll hope you will join us tonight and every night Monday through Saturday 10:30 PM Eastern.
Be sure and join us tonight at 10:30 PM Eastern as we get into the latest in Riley Strain's case, the Delphi case and more.
 
Tuesday, April 16th:
*Motions Hearing (@ 9am PT) – CA – Laci Denise Peterson (27) & Connor (unborn) (missing Dec. 24, 2002, Modesto; found April 13, 2003 in the San Francisco Bay) - *Scott Lee Peterson (30 @ time of crime/31/now 51) convicted & found guilty (11/12/04) of 1st degree murder (Laci) & 2nd degree murder(son) & sentenced (3/16/05) to death by lethal injection. Death penalty was reversed & sentencing to life in prison without the possibility of parole (Laci) & concurrent sentence of 15 years to life (Connor).
His case is currently on automatic appeal to the Supreme Court of California. Sits on San Quentin's death row. Calif. Supreme Court denied a new trial in the guilt phase but reversed the death penalty sentence for Stanislaus County. Also the San Mateo Superior Court will now consider whether there was jury misconduct. Stanislaus County district attorney’s office said it won’t seek the death penalty if there is a new trial.
Re-Sentencing Hearing on 12/8/21. Peterson was moved to San Mateo County jail on 11/29/21 for sentencing hearing. Ordered Peterson to serve life in prison without the possibility of parole for the 1st degree murder of Laci & a concurrent sentence of 15 years to life for the 2nd degree murder of Connor. Peterson was transferred from San Quentin State Prison (~10/21/22) to Mule Creek State Prison.
Motion (12/21/22) for new trial - denied.

Court info from 5/14/20 thru 11/28/22 reference post #409 here:
https://www.websleuths.com/forums/t...-scott-petersons-penalty-phase.548783/page-21

3/12/24 Update: Peterson has a status hearing in Redwood City Tuesday, 3/12/24. This is after the Los Angeles Innocence Project decided to take up his case in January. 18, 2024. Four motions were filed in San Mateo County Superior Court claiming that new evidence now supports Scott's claim of innocence. Legal analyst, Steven Clark said “The Innocence Project is going to start from the ground up & they're going to look at the case as to whether there's any alternative theories as to what happened to Laci & Conner Peterson.” He said that among the things attorneys will be focused on, is a van that was burned near Laci’s home. As far as Tuesday, Clark says the court will likely set a timetable. “So that all the information is made available to the Innocence Project & that they can get their forensic teams in to actually do the testing,” said Clark. “And then it'll be up to the prosecution to review that information & to see whether there’s any merit to it.” Scott will not be at court in person. He will appear via live stream from Mule Creek State Prison in Amador County.
3/12/24 Update: [Case #SC055500A] Judge Hill set the following schedule for Peterson’s future hearings with the LA Innocence Project: Hearing on motion to seal court records on 4/16/24 @ 9am, hearing on DNA testing motion on 5/29/24 @ 9am & hearing on 1054.9 motion on 7/15/24 @ 9am & Peterson will appear via Zoom at all hearings from Mule Creek State Prison. The LA Innocence Project was given a 6-month deadline from the court to complete its Peterson investigation, Mitchell said.
 
Hearing was supposed to be at 9:00 a.m. but there's no live stream anywhere. Maybe it was a closed hearing since it was about the motion to seal.

Edit: CourtTV says they can't air it live but will air it after the the hearing is over.
 
Last edited:
Tuesday's 9 a.m. hearing in Redwood City was on the motion to seal proceedings in the case, which the judge dismissed. Peterson appeared at the brief hearing via Zoom from his location at Mule Creek State Prison in Amador County.
……
A second motion for post-conviction DNA testing is scheduled for May 29 and has to do with a van that was near the Peterson's home that was involved in a burglary at or near the time of Laci's disappearance.

The third motion scheduled for July 15 seeks post-trial discovery from the case, including evidence of the December 2002 burglary across the street from the Petersons' Modesto home, a missing watch belonging to Laci Peterson, and files and documents from witness interviews.

 
Tuesday's 9 a.m. hearing in Redwood City was on the motion to seal proceedings in the case, which the judge dismissed. Peterson appeared at the brief hearing via Zoom from his location at Mule Creek State Prison in Amador County.
……
A second motion for post-conviction DNA testing is scheduled for May 29 and has to do with a van that was near the Peterson's home that was involved in a burglary at or near the time of Laci's disappearance.

The third motion scheduled for July 15 seeks post-trial discovery from the case, including evidence of the December 2002 burglary across the street from the Petersons' Modesto home, a missing watch belonging to Laci Peterson, and files and documents from witness interviews.

How is any of that "post-trial discovery"??? They knew of all of that stuff and tried that defense during the trial. The burglars did it defense. They jury didn't buy it.
 

The state expressed confusion as to why a motion to seal names was filed when no one knows the witnesses, who are listed as anonymous.

The motion mentioned a single exhibit containing redacted information limited to names of witnesses obtained from police reports during the original investigation.

Peterson's defense ultimately agreed to withdraw that exhibit.
 
Peterson’s latest appeal, centered around the possibility of new DNA evidence exonerating him, faces stiff opposition from prosecutors who believe that the existing proof against him is strong enough to uphold his conviction.

The details laid out in the 337-page court filing highlight the extent of the case against him and the intricacies of the investigation that led to his arrest and subsequent trial. As the legal battle continues, with a hearing scheduled for May 29, the question of Scott Peterson’s guilt or innocence remains at the forefront, with both sides presenting their arguments in pursuit of justice for Laci and Conner Peterson.
 
Peterson’s latest appeal, centered around the possibility of new DNA evidence exonerating him, faces stiff opposition from prosecutors who believe that the existing proof against him is strong enough to uphold his conviction.

The details laid out in the 337-page court filing highlight the extent of the case against him and the intricacies of the investigation that led to his arrest and subsequent trial. As the legal battle continues, with a hearing scheduled for May 29, the question of Scott Peterson’s guilt or innocence remains at the forefront, with both sides presenting their arguments in pursuit of justice for Laci and Conner Peterson.
Even if he were re-tried, IMO he'd not going anywhere. Reputable claims and rogue DNA remain outside BARD.

This branch of the Innocence Project must have been in dire need of publicity, the Any Kind Will Do kind.

JMO
 
Even if he were re-tried, IMO he'd not going anywhere. Reputable claims and rogue DNA remain outside BARD.

This branch of the Innocence Project must have been in dire need of publicity, the Any Kind Will Do kind.

JMO
This fishing expedition is a complete waste of time and money. No foreign DNA is going to exonerate him. If so, Geragos would have brought it up at trial. These aren't new theories.
 
The State's opposition below, which was filed last month.

PEOPLE’S OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR DNA TESTING
300+ pages!

The relevant portion for DNA. Pp. 217ff

Quick summary of salient points MOO

Stringent Constitutional requirements for testing DNA isn't met.
Higher threshold post conviction. No longer presumed innocent and that has bearing.
"New evidence" isn't new.
Of hairs found on LP and duct tape, one was stipulated to by the Defense and the other two, as I understand that argument, didn't preclude SP's involvement

Airtight case.

IMHO new trial has no legs to stand on.

JMO
 
In her 2005 book "A Deadly Game" about the Scott Peterson case, the author (Catherine Crier, former judge who was a journalist covering Laci’s case and the trial) mentions a 17-year-old boy from North Dakota who wrote a letter to Anne Bird, Scott’s half sister, in 2004-2005 saying that Peterson was his father from an encounter his deceased mother allegedly had.


The book includes part of a jail letter response from Peterson calling the letter "weird" but not denying the claim.

  1. Peterson's sister thought the anonymous allegation letter from a 17-year-old was significant enough to share with the well-connected journalist working on the case — someone who could and likely would follow up.
  2. As a seasoned reporter with inside access, Crier herself thought the unsubstantiated paternity claim was compelling enough to feature in her book, which shows that she thought it had some validity of some kind, either as a claim or in what it showed about Anne or Scott or both.
  3. According to Crier, multiple relatives of the teen had supposedly dropped "hints" about his deceased mother's alleged fling with Peterson, linking the grandson to the reviled murderer - despite how stigmatizing that would be after his conviction. However, it is not known when they dropped the hints - it could have been long before Scott was in the news, and the kid found a way to follow up after seeing Scott in the news.
The big head-scratchers:

  • Why would Anne Bird share this with a journalist if not credible on some level?
  • What made Crier prioritize including such a strange, unverified claim in her book?
  • Why would any relatives link a teenager to a murderer in the news to the extent that he wrote to a family member of said murderer? Who would want to burden a teenager like that - oh, your mom is dead, and we think your deadbeat dad just got the death penalty.

Crier even quoted part of Peterson's jail response calling the allegation letter "weird."


Here's the full passage for context:


"In January 2005, I was contacted by a seventeen-year-old from North Dakota who believes that Scott Peterson is his father...He began his quest by contacting Scott's half sister, Anne Bird, who forwarded the letter to Jackie and Scott. When I sat down to interview Anne, she showed me Scott's response to the boy's plea, written from jail on January 9. In responding to the letter, Scott writes: "What a weird *advertiser censored* letter you received." He never denies the allegations, and adds only one more line, asking, "Why would someone do such a thing?”


This unresolved claim made it into Crier's book. But what actually motivated the inclusion by her and Peterson's sister? Did she want readers to investigate?


Does anyone know if this potential son and his deceased mother were ever verified or disproven after the book's publication? Or if any more details emerged about this paternity allegation against Peterson? The book left it as an unresolved loose thread
 
In her 2005 book "A Deadly Game" about the Scott Peterson case, the author (Catherine Crier, former judge who was a journalist covering Laci’s case and the trial) mentions a 17-year-old boy from North Dakota who wrote a letter to Anne Bird, Scott’s half sister, in 2004-2005 saying that Peterson was his father from an encounter his deceased mother allegedly had.


The book includes part of a jail letter response from Peterson calling the letter "weird" but not denying the claim.

  1. Peterson's sister thought the anonymous allegation letter from a 17-year-old was significant enough to share with the well-connected journalist working on the case — someone who could and likely would follow up.
  2. As a seasoned reporter with inside access, Crier herself thought the unsubstantiated paternity claim was compelling enough to feature in her book, which shows that she thought it had some validity of some kind, either as a claim or in what it showed about Anne or Scott or both.
  3. According to Crier, multiple relatives of the teen had supposedly dropped "hints" about his deceased mother's alleged fling with Peterson, linking the grandson to the reviled murderer - despite how stigmatizing that would be after his conviction. However, it is not known when they dropped the hints - it could have been long before Scott was in the news, and the kid found a way to follow up after seeing Scott in the news.
The big head-scratchers:

  • Why would Anne Bird share this with a journalist if not credible on some level?
  • What made Crier prioritize including such a strange, unverified claim in her book?
  • Why would any relatives link a teenager to a murderer in the news to the extent that he wrote to a family member of said murderer? Who would want to burden a teenager like that - oh, your mom is dead, and we think your deadbeat dad just got the death penalty.

Crier even quoted part of Peterson's jail response calling the allegation letter "weird."


Here's the full passage for context:


"In January 2005, I was contacted by a seventeen-year-old from North Dakota who believes that Scott Peterson is his father...He began his quest by contacting Scott's half sister, Anne Bird, who forwarded the letter to Jackie and Scott. When I sat down to interview Anne, she showed me Scott's response to the boy's plea, written from jail on January 9. In responding to the letter, Scott writes: "What a weird *advertiser censored* letter you received." He never denies the allegations, and adds only one more line, asking, "Why would someone do such a thing?”


This unresolved claim made it into Crier's book. But what actually motivated the inclusion by her and Peterson's sister? Did she want readers to investigate?


Does anyone know if this potential son and his deceased mother were ever verified or disproven after the book's publication? Or if any more details emerged about this paternity allegation against Peterson? The book left it as an unresolved loose thread
Why would an illegitimate son affect his guilt or innocence?
 

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
216
Guests online
282
Total visitors
498

Forum statistics

Threads
608,001
Messages
18,232,973
Members
234,270
Latest member
bolsa
Back
Top